Good morning and welcome to the standing committee's meeting for Wednesday, December seventeenth, twenty twenty-five.

All council meetings will be live streamed on the city's website and for guest speakers joining us at the table.

Please do not turn off your microphones.

Our first order of business is roll call.

Will the clerk please take the roll?

Mr.

Charland.

Here.

Mr.

Coghill here.

Miss Gross.

Mr.

Lavelle.

Mr.

Mosley.

Miss Cale Smith.

Miss Warwick.

Here.

Mr.

Wilson.

Ms.

Strasberger Chair.

Here.

Six members present.

Thank you.

Our next order of business is public comment.

I would like to remind all speakers that the rules of council state that comments are limited to matters of concern, official action, or deliberation, which are or may be before city council, and profanity will not be permitted.

Please state your name and neighborhood for the record.

You will have three minutes to speak.

Do not see Dr.

Miller.

We will move to Elena Zaitzoff.

We have Alana Zaitsoff.

Do not see Ms.

Saidsoff.

We will move to Dalen Davis.

Good morning, Council.

Bayland Davis of Allentown Belsura neighborhood of the City of Pittsburgh.

I come here today in regards to the 2026 budget deliberations.

I want to strongly urge you not to rely on the housing opportunity fund or the stop the violence fund as tools to resolve the city's fiscal challenges.

I understand the pressures and the complexities that the decisions before you.

However, these two funds were deliberately established to address specific and ongoing crisis here in the city of Pittsburgh, housing instability, and community violence.

They were never intended to function as gap fillers for general budget shortfalls and should remain protected as you consider other options.

The Housing Opportunity Fund is already under significant strain as a response to the rising rents, displacement, and growing affordability pressures across the city.

Diverting any dollar to close budget gaps undermines the fund's core purpose and further destabilizes residents who are already one missed paycheck away from crisis.

Likewise, for the Stop the Violence Fund.

It is essential to support proven preventative strategies that intervene before violence occurs.

Violent crime is down across the city of Pittsburgh as a whole, and it did not happen by chance.

It was a direct result between the sustained coordinated investment from this council and to community partners and organizations and public safety officials.

Interrupting this fund could potentially put at risk all of the gains that have been made.

In July and August of 2025, just this year.

You are held to a higher standard.

We are trying to raid the city of Pittsburgh as corrupt politics.

And it can you should not further embed them into society and people's daily lives.

Make Pittsburgh a case where corrupt cops go to jail.

Allow justice to prevail.

When people show you who they are, you should believe them.

Evaluate and elevate the standard of excellence.

You can't keep doing the same thing and expect different results.

The people in this region and the city deserve better.

And it's up to you to make it better.

And hold him accountable.

Because being the chief of police is a very esteemed position.

They are better choices from within that better represent the ethical and moral disposition of a police chief.

So they know the land in.

And by the way, also they know the waymen until the excellent becomes their standard.

Plant more shady trees.

Do not make any more shady deals.

Lando must go.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our final registered speaker is Laurie Kolczynski.

Hope I got that right.

Yes, you nailed it.

Hi, I am Lori Kolczynski, the general manager of BFI Waste Services of Pennsylvania, a subsidiary of Republic Services.

Our property acquired in February of 2025 is located in Hazelwood and is the target of the legislation in Bill 2025-2385 regarding the transfer station tax amendment.

On behalf of BFI, we object to this legislation.

Under previous ownership, this location began its process to obtain a waste transfer station permit in 2019.

That process included community outreach meetings, and the permit was granted by the PADEP in 2024.

While Councilmember Warwick was in office from 2022 to mid-2025, she brought no actions against this facility, which challenges the allegations this site has and is a detriment to the community.

Councilmember Warwick was made aware of our permits because of a request to vacate an old municipal right-of-way that ran through our newly acquired facility.

While we understand the desire to define a transfer station in the zoning code, the claims made at the planning commission meeting are exaggerated and do not reflect actual operations.

Furthermore, no evidence was provided for the requested boundary limit to increase from 300 feet as required by the state to 500 feet, other than it would eliminate our specific permitted site from use.

Councilmember Warwick's planning commission presentation had a map which showed the area's transfer stations can reportedly be located.

It is unclear what research was done to determine why those locations would be more viable than this already permitted location.

Passing this legislation would also be in direct conflict with the city stated growth and sustainability goals.

Under the resilient Pittsburgh page on the city's website, PittsburghPA.gov, it details how the city joined the 100 Resilient Cities Network in 2014, powered by the Rockefeller Foundation, the RAN Corporation, along with engagement of over 2,000 Pittsburghers.

The Pittsburgh's roadmap to zero waste report was published in 2017 and is also linked on the city's website.

Page 17 specifically talks to the needs and benefits of building a local transfer station in the city of Pittsburgh.

At the top of page 18, we Republic Services are called out as a potential partner as we have a long history of working with the city.

The next bullet addresses where it should be and lists the location in Hazelwood as a viable location, detailing the proximity to the existing MURF that is now our facility as a requirement.

If you would like, we did print copies of those pages for your review.

A transfer station supports the city's need to improve waste and recycling services to our residents with reduced cost to the city through fewer miles traveled by eliminating the landfill trips, reduced fuel consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions, as well as long as longer maintenance cycles for those vehicles.

It also provides a local site for drop-off service to help curb illegal dumping and help keep keep our streets cleaner.

This legislation should be considered as part of the previously proposed legislation bill 2025-1993.

Thank you.

Which was already recommended about the body.

Submit your full comments to us.

Thank you very much.

There being no further registered speakers, we will now take comments from those in the audience wishing to speak.

Are there any speakers wishing to come to the podium?

Good morning, counsel.

My name is Reverend Robert Tetter, and I am representing Project Destiny, a long-standing community-based organization and a recipient of the Stop the Violence Fund Support.

Project Destiny works daily with youth and families in neighborhoods that are most impacted by gun violence, trauma, and instability.

These funds are not just sitting idly by.

They are actively supporting prevention, mentoring, intervention, and stabilization work across Pittsburgh.

As a provider on the ground, well, we see the impact firsthand.

Youth engaged instead of isolated, families stabilized instead of overwhelmed.

Conflicts interrupted before they escalate.

The 37% reduction in gun violence and the lowest uh levels in more than eight years are not abstract numbers.

They represent lives and communities that are healing.

We are deeply concerned about the proposal to pause funding transfers to the Stop the Balance Fund.

Uh, we rely solely on uh the unspent balance uh and that uh transfer of funds to other sources or either reduction of any funding would stop the continuity, the predictability and sustainability of grassroots and neighborhood-based organizations like ours.

Uh, we would urge you to continue to support and stand by your previous support of these funds and know that moving forward we must not go backwards.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Good morning, my name is Yvonne F.

Brown.

I have brought my sign down, but I forgot to bring it up.

But in on it, you'll see there's August Wilson.

I made a statement last, I think it might have been a couple weeks ago, where I said that August Wilson, when he came to stay in Pittsburgh, he would stay at it was the double tree on um on the boulevard, um Big Low Boulevard.

And I had said that the our owner said that August would, whenever he came to Pittsburgh, he would stay in the double tree upstairs.

But he would come down to the store and buy stuff, and they talked quite a bit.

And he said once August left, another um patron said to him, Do you know who that is?

You know he's very famous.

That's August Wilson.

Now he um was saying how pleasant August was, and like I told Jens uh I I got a chance to meet August Wilson three times in here.

The first time he came, I looked, I said, Oh, that's August Wilson.

So I I get the proclamation and I go over to him and I say, I know who you are, sign this.

And he signed it, and I went and sat down.

And I looked back, he was chuckling to himself.

Now, when I talked to August when Rob Penny died out in front of the um the church on center, he told me to keep coming down and tell him my story.

Because if not it's history, your story, his story, okay.

When I come down, I come down because you can't know everything.

And you shouldn't be ashamed that you don't, but you should be ashamed that you don't listen when the people come down and talk.

You're on your phones, computers, tablets.

And then another thing, when you people, any of you that come down and get a proclamation and they give you a proclamation.

It seems like you could sit and listen to the people that are saying we have problems instead of leaving or talking while we're talking.

You know what?

I try to teach my children how to respect people because you are not a good example at all.

You're not.

I can remember Dr.

Miller was talking.

Yes, we're late as usual, 10:30.

You started today.

Usually start at 1025.

Just talk about the budget.

You are causing some of the problems.

A half an hour every meeting that you don't start, that's cop, that's like white noise.

It's just you're just talking.

The elder white woman said she came down.

She said, I came down with someone who's getting a proclamation.

She said, I just wanted to see what city council was doing.

You know what she said, Miss Brown, I couldn't believe it.

They meandering, then they stand in and talking to each other.

Don't look back at us at all.

We're sitting here.

We come to tell you that there's a problem.

And if you can help us, please try.

Shut your mouth and what and listen to us.

Please forgive me.

I get upset.

I know I shouldn't.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Good morning, good morning.

My name is Ross Tutter.

My name was called a little bit earlier.

I'm just arriving, so good.

Good morning.

Um, I'll be brief, um, echoing some of what my coworker and my father said uh uh before me.

Um now is not the time to rob Peter to pay Paul, right?

Um I understand that you guys have a difficult task ahead of you in terms of the city's finances, managing that, figuring out a path forward.

Um, you know, this is not isolate to Pittsburgh, right?

The the U.S.

economy, right, is not doing great.

The global economy is not doing great.

So I understand that you guys have a tough job.

Um now is not the time to take away power from community in terms of how we govern ourselves and in terms of how we ensure our own safety, right?

Um, so I would urge you that as you're making these decisions as you're moving forward, um, that you know, taking from the South of Violence Fund is not the go-to, right?

That is not something that we um will accept, right?

And other than that, um, it's not gonna bring anything good to our communities.

So thank you.

Um it's been a good year, right?

And I look forward to, you know, what next year has a story.

So thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Good morning, special agent sunshine.

Lord, thank you for using me as a vessel to do your will, not mine.

Father God, help us to understand that you are with us in all situations.

Increase our faith and help us to trust in you fully in Jesus' mighty name.

Amen.

I want to talk to you about a couple things today.

Um trusting God's will.

Matthew 19, 26 says, Jesus beheld them and said unto them, with men, this is impossible.

With but with God, all things are possible.

The thought for today is a small act of compassion can be the miracle I need.

You guys have done a lot to me.

But yet, still, here I stand on God's promises.

Still alive, still healthy, praise God, still beautiful on the inside, no matter how many times you'll pay people brand money to kill me for what he wants me to have.

When we completely surrender ourselves to God's will, we open ourselves to experience God's wonderful deeds.

I left an apartment I stayed in seven years, one bedroom section and unit in Atlanta, fully furnished.

I left my job at Walmart of over six months, and chose to love God and myself above all others.

And I told them everything in that apartment was just stuff.

And that all I needed was him, and that he would take care of me, he promised to take care of me, and he would leave me and guide me where I needed to be.

And this is where he led me.

Ephesians 6 13 says, whereby take unto you the harm of God, then you may be able to withstand in the evil day of having done all to stand.

In the evil day of having done all to stand.

I've done all to stand.

Every fairy dark thrown at me.

Every prediction of hate, jealousy, and envy thrown at me.

Here I still stand.

And I can tell all of you from my heart.

I still love and forgive all of y'all.

Everybody part of this case in Jesus' name.

Amen.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Morning, council.

As you weigh the 2026 budget, I want to encourage you to not use the housing opportunity fund, nor the stop the violence fund, as solutions to the city's fiscal challenges.

I recognize the difficulty of the decisions before you.

Housing instability and community violence.

And they should remain protected as you evaluate alternatives.

The Housing Opportunity Fund is already stressed, responding to rising rents, displacement, and affordability, affordability issues and pressures, using it to close a budget gap, undermines its purpose, and further weakens housing stability, opportunity, and stability for our residents and those who are already on the edge.

Similarly, a stop the violence fund is vital because it supports prevention strategies that intervene before violence escalates, including community outreach, credibility messengers, targeted intervention, and support services that reduce retaliation and break cycles of harm.

Pittsburgh is seeing a decline in violent crime.

And that progress did not happen by accident.

It reflects sustained coordinated efforts that pair with community-based groups working in partnership with public safety representatives, reducing or pausing this funding risk reversing the momentum, the positive momentum, as evidence as violence prevention relies on consistency and relies on trust.

When funding becomes uncertain, programs lose staff.

Make sense.

Seeing no further speakers, we will now move on to our standing committees agenda.

And our first committee is the Finance and Law Committee.

We have three deferred papers.

We'll start with Bill 2109.

Bill 2109, ordinance amending and supplementing the Pittsburgh Code of Ordinances, Title I, Administrative, Article 9, Boards, Commissions, and Authorities.

Registered Community Organizations by Updating Standards and Responsibilities.

Councilwoman, you're up.

Yeah.

RCN.

I'm in a motion to table it because we have a group working on it and then coming in.

The new administration has some ideas, so I thought we'll then work on what's happening in the future.

So we have a motion to table table.

Second.

Second.

Do we need a roll call vote?

Well, we'll have a roll call vote for a motion to table.

Sorry, is that point of clarification?

If we table a zoning bill, does it die at the end of the year?

No, zoning doesn't die.

Right.

This so this would stay on the agenda until it's untabled.

Yeah.

Okay.

Mr.

Sharlan.

Aye.

Mr.

Coghill.

Aye.

Miss Gross.

Aye.

Mr.

Lavell.

Mr.

Mosley.

Aye.

Ms.

Kell Smith.

Aye.

Ms.

Warwick.

Aye.

Mr.

Wilson.

Aye.

Ms.

Strasberger Chair.

Aye.

Title 1.

Ayes 9.

Bill is tabled.

Thank you.

Do you mind if I just say I just want to say the reason we came down this road?

Because we do hear a lot of complaints, a lot of concerns from the public.

So you do absolutely have to address this issue, I think, come in the coming year.

But I think RCOs need to understand that they're part of the city that they and have part of a voice, but they're not the only voice that needs to be heard in the city of Pittsburgh.

They speak for some people, not all people.

And so with that said, I hope that you come up with something that makes people feel comfortable that their voices will always be heard.

Thank you.

Not just a select few for RCOs.

Thank you.

We'll move now to Bill 2482.

Bill 2482.

Resolution authorizing and directing the mayor, solicitor, director of planning, and director of office of management and budget pursuant to 204K of the Home Rule Charter to provide appropriate notice and terminate the contract with Sasake and Common Cause Consultants per Article 3.2 termination of the agreement.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none.

All those in we'll take a roll call vote for this as well.

All those in favor of Bill 2482.

Mr.

Sharlan.

Aye.

Aye.

Mr.

Coghills.

Aye.

Ms.

Gross.

Aye.

Mr.

Lavelle.

Sorry, aye.

Mr.

Mosley.

No.

Ms.

Kel Smith.

Teresa.

Ms.

Warwick.

Aye.

Mr.

Wilson.

Aye.

Ms.

Strasberger, Chair.

No.

Ms.

Mrs.

Kell Smith.

Councilwoman Cale Smith.

Apologies.

We we need your vote.

There's major questions.

Aye.

No two.

Did you do that?

Bill is approved.

And 2483.

Resolution authorizing and directing the mayor, solicitor, director of planning, and director of office of management and budget pursuant to 204K of the Pittsburgh Home Rule Charter to provide appropriate notice and terminate the contract with HRNA advisors and urban AC LLC per Article 3.2 termination of the agreements.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, we will also take a roll call vote.

Mr.

Sharlan.

Aye.

Mr.

Callkills.

Aye.

Ms.

Gross.

Aye.

Mr.

Lavell.

No.

Mr.

Moslin.

No.

Ms.

Kale Smith.

Aye.

Miss Warwick.

Aye.

Mr.

Wilson?

Aye.

Ms.

Strasberger Chair.

No.

Aye six.

No three.

Bill is approved.

Thank you.

And now we'll move on to new papers.

To Bill 2614.

Resolution authorizing the issuance of a warrant in favor of Manuel R.

Manker Estate.

Aline Hughes administrator for a single payment in 2025 and an amount not to exceed $5,000 in full and final settlement of litigation filed in the Allegheny County Court of Common, please.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2614, please indicate by saying aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 2615.

Resolution authorizing the issuance of a warrant in favor of Ethel M.

Jordan Estate, Orienta Neville's, and Leotines Duncan administrators for a single payment in 2025 in an amount not to exceed $5,000 in full and final settlement of litigation filed in the Allegheny County Court of Common, please.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2615, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 2616.

Resolution authorizing the issuance of a warrant in favor of Sabrina Kite for a single payment in 2025 and an amount not to exceed $5,000 and full and final settlement of litigation filed in the Allegheny County Court of Common, please.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2616, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 2617.

Resolution authorizing seven.

Open in professional services agreements with five vendors to provide professional services on an on-call basis as required related to building department training services as needed by the various departments of the city of Pittsburgh.

Each agreement being at an amount not to exceed $250,000 annually for a three-year term and providing for funding of the cost thereof.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2617, please indicate by saying aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 2618.

Resolution repealing items and resolutions approved on various states, which authorize the sell of property in various wards of the city of Pittsburgh due to an incompletion of sale items A through G.

701 Webster Terrace, Council District 6.

530 Janella Street, Council District 6, 1309, Paulson Street, Council District 9, 0 Mountain Avenue, District 3.

0 Pliny Way, District 3, 123, Overbeck Street, District 1, 2248, Lucina Avenue, District 4.

Motion to approve.

Just briefly, I think Director Gul is here to talk about this.

Good morning.

Thanks for being here, Director.

I'm just curious why, and I apologize for not following up to you beforehand.

Why were these uh it is the incompletion of the sale?

What what happened there?

So these are individuals that um failed to close on their property.

So we give them ample time and notification that they come and pay their balance payment in order for us to finally transfer the property and the deed over to them, and they fail to do so.

And so then after a certain period of time, they forfeit.

Or they've notified us on some occasion that they don't want to purchase the property anymore.

And this is actually after we've already achieved quiet title.

So this is like the final closing, and they failed to close.

So from this point, do we auction them off again?

Yep, they're back.

They should become available for sale.

And um, we actually owe quite we have quiet title, but we probably have to amend it because it's quite in the name of the purchaser.

But yeah, so the process should become a lot quicker.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um I think this I believe this is the first time I've seen this happen, so thanks for being able to answer the questions from the we actually um we have done this on many occasions.

I think for a while we weren't, which was important to state that we were just letting things sit there and not finish.

And as a part of this process, the city is actually entitled to the forfeited funds in order to cover the costs that we've already expended.

So it is important that we actually do this and hold purchasers accountable to the contract they actually signed with us.

So just to clarify, I have pro I mean I I don't think I have personally seen this before.

I'm I'm sure we've done it before.

Just I it's not something I've missed for.

So it's okay.

Thank you.

Further discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2618, please indicate by saying I.

I Affirmative Recommendation, Mr.

Thank you, Director.

State.

Bill 2619.

Resolution providing for the sell of certain property acquired by the City of Pittsburgh at tax sales, items A through AG.

2610 Bedford Avenue, District 6, 2612 Bedford Avenue District 6, 0 Francis Street, District 6, 2903 Center Avenue, District 6, 5360 Hill Crest Street, District 9, 5362 Hill Crest Street, District 9, 5406 Kincaid Street, District 9, 6940 Hartman Lane, District 9, 0 Westmoreland Avenue, District 9, 1600 Lincoln Avenue, District 9, 4644 Chatsworth Street, District 5, 4642 Chatsworth Street, District 5, 4632 Chatsworth Street, District 5, 436 Parkwood Road, District 3, 42 Lafferty Avenue, District 3, 44 Lafferty Avenue, District 3, 1611 Velasco Avenue, District 4, 0 Val Rouge Street, District 2, 906 Valonia Street, District 2, 852 Sleuzman Street, District 1, 1133 Eighton Street, District 1, 1125, Vascomp Street, District 1, 2046 Lay Street, District 1, 99 Fountain Street, District 1, 40 West McIntyre Avenue, District 6, 1601, Spring Garden Avenue, District 1, 98, Watson Boulevard, District 1, 0 Marshall Avenue, District 1, 0 Richardson Avenue, District 1, 3221 Central Avenue, District 1, 237 East Myer Street, District 4, 4408 Armor Hill Avenue, District 5, and 927 Armour Avenue, District 5.

Motion to approve discussion.

Second second discussion, Councilman Wilson.

I just had a question.

What prompted all these sales?

Um just the standard doing what we do.

So nothing different.

Okay, thanks.

Yeah.

Council Member Warwick.

Um I just said so.

Um I looked up these sales and learned from Councilwoman Gross that you always look up the sales in your district.

Um yeah, so Armor Hill Road, those two are not, those are just like someone expanding their yard, basically.

Um I wanted to ask for the Chatsworth ones.

Um my understanding is that the plan is to do house, you know, some kind of housing on them.

Is there any stipulation about like how long it there it takes?

I mean, so once they own it, is there any rule that they have to like get a move on and do what they're gonna do?

So the only there is a reverter clause in all of our deeds.

However, I don't know that it necessarily pertains or is project specific.

Um it does state that they must obviously pay taxes, um, that they have to abide by any PLI or um they can't get any PLI violations or anything like health code violations, um, or we do have the ability to take it back.

I don't know specifically that it mentions anything that if you intend to do a project, if you do that project, we reserve the right to recall it.

So and um if you're able to answer did the person who ultimately got these outbid anyone local or you know what I mean?

I'm just curious if they were like local people or maybe the CDC that maybe also want it's just because these you know this particular street is so as part of the process, um the plan planning, the URA and the land bank, which also touches base with the CDC's weigh in on whether or not we should actually sell the property.

So that kind of expertise doesn't live in the finance department, like the finance department's main and only goal is really to turn these properties back out into the world and become revenue generating again.

So we don't like have the ability their expertise to look at those things, so we ask these other partners or interested parties whether or not it's beneficial to sell them and for what the intended end use would be.

Um that's all I can tell you.

I don't know if there were other applicants that applied if there if there were um other bidders that could then object to the sale.

There could have been other applicants that may not have been approved and they could have been you know, local people, so that I don't know.

So could I and again I I'm I'm I'm supportive, I'm glad that you know if there's vacant lots that someone's gonna build housing on them, even you know, I I'm glad that there's building going on.

But it would be is it possible just in the in between now and the final vote just to know if there was any I'm just curious if people are applying for the properties and not getting them.

So you know from the here's what else I can also tell you that so based on the information and the applications that we receive and uh get approved, this is what comes to council.

There could be there's a specific window of time where other people could be then apply for the same property, be approved and vetted as a buyer to buy the property, and then could potentially become objectors to the sale, which would then force a um which could then force a court uh a court auction which would be decided by a judge and go to the highest bidder.

So the person that's in this legislation currently may not be the one that actually ends up getting it.

Oh, so very end, and that would be not our decision, that would be a judge's decision based on the pool of bidders potentially.

So in theory, someone could so after this vote, in theory, someone could come in and object and and they could there's a window of time where they would be able to do that.

Okay and they would have to it would then be go in front of a judge who would perform an auction and the judge would award to the highest bidder.

Okay, okay.

I uh this is more just me just asking about the process.

So uh but it would I I I'd be curious to know if there was anyone else who applied for the I could I could ask you know when I can ask and let you know.

Right, right.

Um and then um Yeah, just obviously because you know, when in emerging neighborhoods you do get folks who just buy a property and then sit on it and don't do anything with it, and uh so if that's uh you know I either way want to make sure that that they're keeping it up, right?

Keeping it mowed, keeping it clean and all of that.

But um in any case, so yeah, thanks.

And any additional info just by email would be great.

Thank you.

Thank you, councilwoman Cale Smith.

Thank you.

I think well thank you very much for your work and and I always liked working with Aaron Pickett too because he was always he made sure the council knew it was happening, so it wasn't a surprise when it came to the table, and I appreciate that.

Um but I I'd like to know a little bit more information on the properties in district two and any and L C is what I want to know.

Okay, well, did you get your packets?

We did actually print out I did see and we brought them for this because there's some of the same streets repeatedly from the last packet.

So they should have been for this specific legislation.

Okay.

So but they were brought up to council yeah, they were brought up to the front desk and for each council they should.

Well, I saw it was an email.

It was an email?

Yeah.

Okay.

It was for the property similar to the process.

I emailed you after you requested the last time I was here, and I went for the last property then.

That was for the last property.

This one we brought up a pack, we individually printed out all the backup information staff.

I did not see that.

Yep.

And it came via interoffice envelope addressed to each individual council district, and it was asked to be hand delivered to all of your offices.

So the every office who's represented in this legislation.

So if it if you didn't have any council district wasn't part of this legislation, then I'll double check on that, but I went back to my question.

I want to know if any are L C do know of any other LCs.

And can we prevent them from buying so many properties?

Because how do we give preference to city residents?

I don't think we we cannot do that legally.

Legally, that's what I'm asking.

Yeah, it has to be we have to leave it open to everyone.

So I think on our end we've done certain things in order to like place limits where we could legally place limits on who gets property, but because it is public property and it's the same even with the buildings that we own, all the public has to be able to have access to buy it, regardless of whether they live here or not.

I think with that is that we're continuing to put the same neighborhoods at risk time and time again.

And because that's where these properties are going to be for you know for sale in areas that are already struggling.

Yep.

And Sheridan, you know, they were saturated with housing authority properties, oversaturated, which is illegal.

And that but that was decades ago.

And um they're still paying the price for a lot of that because now they have a lot of vacant homes again, um, which it just kept the c decline going.

And so now with these L L C's, I have a bigger concern.

Even though property insurance is starting to go really high, it's actually concerning me because I you know I don't want to gentrify that area either.

So um the council absolutely has the authority to strike any of the sales that you know that's don't feel comfortable with, but like as the department, we can't limit who has access to it and who doesn't.

So and I have done that in the past, that's which is why it is always supportive of the real estate department doing the link the the sales versus you know the land bank or other places.

But I do know we also need to move these.

So I wish what we would do is work with the land bank and gather a you know group of parcels and increase something like the housing um co-op in Sheridan, which is affordable, you know, and so I would love to see something like that, you know, happen before all these properties get out of control and and out of hands from local people.

That's it for me.

Thank you.

I'm gonna look and see who's who's purchasing these and what's happening, and I'll you know if I'll delete them for next.

Let me know if for any reason you didn't get the packet that was sent to you, and I'll have Amanda produce another copy and bring it up.

I think thank you.

Can I think thank you very much for all your work in all the years of Thanksgiving?

Yeah.

Councilman Coghouse.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh Councilwoman McKill Smith, that's the exact questions that I really wanted to ask.

And I think I share the same concerns as she does and Councilwoman Warwick and to Councilwoman Gross's credit, two years ago she was saying, Oh, they're gonna LLC is gonna be buying up everything in my neighborhood, and and sure enough, you know, there are LLCs from out of town purchasing 90 homes just in Beach View alone.

And when we talk about affordable housing, this is killing us.

This is a backbreaker, it really is.

This is what this is why we don't have affordable housing available to people, because as councilwoman Warwick said they sit on it.

So you realize your position, you can't strike somebody from out of town in LLC.

But you say that City Council does have that authority.

Do we know do we have um the are we privy to the information as to like this is an LLC from San Diego?

So when you in those packets that we send up to you, the buyer is listed and their actual intended use.

So we can only go I don't know if the address is there, but the name is absolutely there.

It tells you who's buying it.

So we would have to do our own homework.

You might have to Google and see.

But um, I mean, on our end, we try to do as best we can with what we're able to do legally to try to limit those types of things.

But can you legally ask them to um state their headquarters or where they're located?

I mean, it is on their application, and I have to I can't say whether or not I can't recall.

There's a sheet that we give you that has all of this information and it gives you a complete like property description.

Um it tells you where it's located.

We even include a map, and it's there's usually a lot of information too concerning who's buying it and what they're doing with it, whether or not it actually contains um the address and a contact number, because we also have to be careful about other some types of information that we share because it may not actually be able to be shared with the public.

Because we do ask for like uh uh F E I N number or or uh social security number, those types of things in order to do certain background checks, which we would not be allowed to disclose to you.

Um but there's probably information in there, or you if it's not you might have to actually Google it and see where they're located.

So there's ways around that.

If they're an LLC from San Diego, as I said, they could set up uh P.O.

box here in Pittsburgh and or none the wiser.

Well, I actually stumbled inadvertently across one that absolutely filled out an application as an individual.

And just for some reason I Googled the individual that was actually a real estate broker from Florida.

So it's types of and which was actually part of a side yard sale.

So these are things that I can't stop them from buying property, but it was absolutely a misrepresentation of who they were and what they were actually doing.

So on its face it works, but there's always gonna be someone trying to game the system.

Absolutely and we can't always find all of that.

So that's I guess councils we have to take that up in some manner or some fashion to try to identify who's actually buying them.

But for me, it's the biggest threat to affordable housing at this point.

When I see somebody controlling 80 homes in my district or in one neighborhood in my district, well, they they're controlling the market basically, and whether they're controlling the rents and they're controlling everything.

And I agree with Councilwoman McKill Smith that we could they're you know, preying on where I want to say affordable, but you know, we're they're not gonna do this in Housing Park, for instance, you know, but they're gonna gobble up properties in every one of our neighborhoods that are somewhat affordable, and they choose sometimes to sit on them.

And it's really frustrating because if their weeds are grown up everywhere and we want to cite them, we cite them and they don't respond, and we don't even know you know what we do is cite them, cite them, cite them, they refuse, refuse, refuse, and we don't reply.

So okay.

I just uh thank you.

I understand your position completely.

I think this council needs to kind of look at that deeper and figure out how we can stop this purge of our properties from happening.

So thank you.

Sure.

Director.

Thank you.

We are still on first round.

We have council.

Yes.

Councilman Councilman Council President.

I don't see all Francis Street, but I can't find a zero Francis Street on any map.

Could that be the typo?

It's so every time that a property, if there was a structure on the property that was raised, um the actual house number reverts to zero.

So there could be several.

You would have to look at the parcel ID in order to identify specifically which parcel it is.

Okay, thank you.

Um then I'm going to make a motion to delete item fee and D because if I'm not mistaken, both of these we were looking at as part of our choice neighborhood and fill for um affordable housing development, for real housing development.

Um I will go physically go find item fee to make sure I'm not mistaken, but for the time being, I would like to make a motion to lead item C and D.

Second.

Discussion.

All in favor of the voice of amendment to delete items C and D.

Please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Thank you.

Motion passes, and it's discussion on the bill as amended.

Anything further, Council Presidents.

No, thank you.

Thank you.

So we're still on first round, Councilman Mosley.

Yeah, I just want to make a motion um to strike on item G 5406 Kincaid Street.

That's the LLC from Gainesville, Florida, and um and strike item 86940, Hartman Lane.

It's someone out of Bristol, Virginia.

Second motion is a voice vote to strike items G and H.

Second, all those in favor of striking items G and H, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Motion passes.

Discussion on the bill as amended.

We are on to second round.

Councilmember Warbeck.

Um yeah, I just wanted to ask.

So um well to any future buyers out there, I would recommend as a best practice to reach out to the council person of the district because we can just strike your sale.

We should make that part of the thing.

So that I would say that and I will say here, so you know, we have the the Armor Hill Avenue, like that those are homeowners, right?

Who reached out into the office and wanted to know you know what I mean?

Like, how can we do this?

Blah, blah, blah.

So I saw it and I saw you know, when I looked it up, I saw their names, like, oh great, it went through, right?

So that feels good.

And um, I'm not gonna do that here for the chats worth one now.

But if you know someone is out there listening, and that could be for members, like you know, that could be just uh individual members' prerogative, right?

To say, hey, if there's a sale and I have not heard from the person trying to buy um this property, then I'm just you know, matter of course, not gonna approve it.

Um because you know it it is important, and we you know, as council members, we represent the best interests of our communities, the people who live in our communities, and um we want to make sure that anyone buying property, at least off of the city in our communities is um is going to be adding to the um you know making the neighborhood a better place to live.

So I'll leave it at that.

Thank you.

Any further discussion?

Seeing seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2619 as amended, please indicate by saying aye.

Okay.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 2620.

Resolution repealing an item in resolution number 805, effect of December 7th, 2023, in order to rescind the sale.

Is there a motion?

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of bill 2620, please indicate by saying I'm just going to stay.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 2621.

Ordinance amending the Pittsburgh Code Title II Fiscal Article 1 Administration, Chapter 202.

Debt Management Policy by updating the language in a chapter following the periodic review outline in section 2021.

Motion to approve.

Is there a second?

Second discussion.

Discussion, Councilman Wilson.

Howdy again.

How's it going?

No, so um Jen Gula, the Department of Finance Director and the City Treasurer.

So back in 2011, as part of like migrating or starting to migrate out of Act 47 while we were still under it.

And so this dictates basically some of the parameters that we use in order to make sure that when we do borrow that we stay within our limits and that we structure the debt accordingly so we don't have um balloon payments and such, and that we don't use things that could affect the overall interest rates and who's responsible for doing what and the reporting and so forth.

So as part of the the policy, it actually requires us to review it every so often.

And so we've done that in the past.

I think back in 2017, we usually use our municipal advisors to go through it.

And so we just did that again.

And so we've made some changes, mostly it's just housekeeping to the like some of the language that was outdated and the bills now been struck, and some of the definitions have been updated.

And so that's basically what we brought before you in order to make sure that we're doing our due diligence and actually follow following the policy ourselves by doing you know a deep dive into what the policy actually states.

Okay, thanks.

Further discussion?

Councilwoman Gross.

So I think what I've gathered is that you made you're making changes to the debt management policy.

Is that what I'm hearing?

Not necessarily, not on a whole sale.

We updated some of the language.

So I don't see the updates.

I guess they're in the text files.

But I don't have the text files in front of me.

And I didn't do my homework on this bill before I got here.

So I don't know if anybody else has read the policies on debt management.

But it seems like something that I'm I have confidence in you, but um, you know, we can't just not read it.

So um, did you need this pass?

Does it need to be like here in the middle of budget season in December for some reason?

Because this is you know, we we have a lot of stuff on our plates.

So we would like to only because obviously in the beginning of the year we will start looking at doing a borrowing, and so we obviously refer to this an awful lot so that any clarity that needed to be given, like this would be in place ahead of doing that.

Did was there a briefing that I missed on this?

I can speak to that.

Director Goula offered a briefing.

We did not have any time in our calendar to to actually hold a briefing prior to this conversation today.

We might be able to squeeze one in between now and the final vote if we vote on it today, but I think that's probably the best we can do in terms of briefings, aside from individual briefings that council members could have.

Thank you, madam chair.

But I I just I can't tell the public I voted on something without even knowing what it says when it's this important to our fiscal health.

So I can't be I can't vote yes on provisional vote today.

Um I don't know if any m other members have any.

Thank you.

If it also makes you feel better, I think we also have something that was prepared by the municipal advisors that we could actually forward to council if you wanted to, outside of having an actual briefing so that you could read it on your own.

I would summarize some of the changes that we made.

Sure.

So further discussion.

But what I see as updates are, for instance, references to goals that we were seeking to reach by 2019 that's no longer relevant.

Um I mean everyone should read it for themselves, but uh there and absolutely, you know, everyone should read it prior to final vote on at our next regular meeting.

Um raise any questions that you have before then.

We can always recommit or no they are minimal changes.

So um and certainly I'll take another perusal of it as well.

Is it expired?

Is there any further discussion?

Who's got the table?

Who has the floor?

I do.

Okay.

Is there any further discussion?

Absolutely.

Second.

Um, so does this bill expire if we hold a week?

I can't keep track of the dates, Minal Clerk.

Oh my computer shut down.

Give me a second.

Sure, sure.

So I believe we have our regular council meeting and our standing committees on the 22nd, and we have a final regular meeting on the 29th.

That are divorced from the budget discussion.

So they're on the vote on Sunday.

Mondays are gonna be okay.

Sorry.

This bill, if we held it a week, would come up on Monday in standing committee, which would be the afternoon of the 22nd.

So it would not be final vote on the 22nd if we hold one week.

Correct.

It would be final vote.

So then if we hold one week, it's on standing committee on Monday the 22nd.

And then so the final vote would be the 29th, I think they said I don't see the calendar.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Okay, so there's a regular meeting on the 29th.

So if it's the will of the body, and be happy to just hold a week.

It's gonna be a busy week.

I understand.

Right.

But now we all know.

Just we need you know, we have a lot of faith in Director Rula.

I don't think she's ever steered us wrong.

But I again, I just don't want to vote on the fiscal policy for this city when we're in this fiscal situation without having double checked it myself.

So I appreciate it.

If the if there's will at council, I'll motion to hold one week.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of holding one week, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Bill be held one week.

Bill 2632.

Ordinance amending the Pittsburgh Code Title II fiscal, Article 9, property taxes, chapter 263, real property tax and exemption, uh fixing the rate of real estate taxation for 2026.

Uh motion to hold for public hearing scheduled on December 20th.

Second.

Discussion?

Seeing none.

All those in favor, but is this for the tax and can I just uh request from the law department a legal opinion on whether or not this is um legal to increase taxes that by this percentage?

Sorry, what is the what is the specific question?

Um is this legal?

Uh legal is it legal for us to increase taxes by this percentage?

There's already um there's already a quest in to the law department for an expedited review and did you do that publicly?

Council president made that request.

Okay, I didn't know that.

Okay, and we'll have it before okay, thank you.

Did you know who made that?

Um further discussion on the motion to hold for the middle of evening cable cast public hearing.

And council.

Seeing none, all those in favor of holding for cable cast public hearing, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

That moves us on to invoices, invoices.

Is there a motion on invoices?

So moved.

Second.

Discussion?

Seeing none, all those in favor of invoices, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Invoices are approved.

That moves us on to intradepartmental transfers.

Is there a motion on transfers?

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none.

All those in favor of in of interdepartmental transfers, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Transfers are approved.

Is there a motion on P cards?

So moved.

Second.

Discussion?

Seeing none.

All those in favor of P cards, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

P cards are approved.

Is there a motion on uh that moves us to public safety and wellness committee chair by Councilman Cockhill?

New papers.

Bill 2622.

Resolution authorizing pursuant to Chapter 210 acceptance of the gifts to the city of the City Code, the mayor and director of the Department of Public Safety to accept a donation from the Friends of Allegheny County Sheriff's Office Unit of the K9, value that 10,500.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2622, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 2636.

Resolution authorizing the mayor and the director of public safety to enter into a professional services agreement or agreements with the center that cares for group violence intervention in social services cost not to exceed six million dollars over two years.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none.

Absolutely.

Yes.

I believe that Director Schmidt can speak to this.

Director Schmidt come up, yeah.

We're calling summoning Director Schmidt to the table.

I thought there was the end of my question.

Director Schmidt.

Michael, sorry.

We're spending six million dollars.

Morning, Lee Schmidt, public safety director.

We need it.

Good morning, Director.

Thank you.

There was a question.

Councilwoman Cal Smid had a question.

Could you just give me a little synopsis of what's what's happening with this?

Yeah, so six million dollars is going through.

The current REACH contract comes to an end at the end of this year.

We did an RFP.

We received submissions based on our scope of work that we put through to ensure our GVI, you know, the group violence and community intervention, violence and eruption services to continue.

We had multiple respondents and center that cares received the uh.

Where is it?

Um that's the same organization that currently does it.

Yeah, it's Reverend Grayson's organization up in the Hill District.

Okay.

And he got the grant he wanted again?

Yes.

Okay.

Um I I will just say this that I um the one part of the anti-violence stuff I like is the REACH program because I've actually seen what they've done.

And um I'm gonna just shout out Christopher Ralph really quickly because I was at an event, Mayors in the street event in Elliott, and three fights broke out and police were there and um other people were you know, all around.

But it was Christopher Ruff who three times from REACH intervened and stopped the fighting three different times on the street until finally he got a handle on the whole thing, and um and the police did help when they were there, but immediately the kids responded to Christopher.

So I want to make sure I shall I I I say that when I hi how when I see them that I know they're there.

I don't and I have seen them actually stop the violence and prevent the violence and intervene.

So other than if I didn't see it myself, I'd be skeptical, but I actually saw it.

So I want to say that you know thank them for their work.

And thank you for your work, it's been so great working with you.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Further discussion?

Council member Warwick.

Um yeah, I I want to say too, I've I've had very good experiences with the REACH team in my district, specifically at Alderdice School.

Um, there was an sort of kind of ongoing issue of a bus stop that is just in no way equipped to handle an entire high school of kids, you know, pouring out of school at 3 p.m.

is just an and um uh Rick Butler from the REACH team is really been outstanding and helping deal with that situation, and then also just just being in the school in general.

Um thing that I do want to say just sort of for the record with regard to to this and and all other stop the violence efforts going forward.

You know, I know that there is a lot of concern among the community, you know, with the you know, out a new administration that that that these um that these uh efforts continue, right, and that this funding continues and we keep doing this good work.

And I think that uh just as council and for the public, uh what I would like to see moving into next year and something that I've discussed with David Jones with um um and and and some others uh is um something very similar to what we do for around traffic deaths, right?

Around the vision zero around traffic deaths, but doing that for um for gun violence, right?

Where we are literally tracking every single incident, understanding who, you know, how what was the response, who was there, what's being done, et cetera, et cetera.

You know what the status of the case is, like really tracking each one all the way through uh so that we as a city um continue to keep this top of mind with the understanding that no one should be shot in the city of Pittsburgh, and um and that we are gonna continue to drill literally drill down.

And by the way, there aren't so many shootings that you can't do this, right?

This is we are actually in a very good position at the moment um to be able to do this.

It's not some wild number that you know that we just would would be impossible to track that closely.

Um I think that that will be and I I look forward to working with other members, but um and the and the incoming administration on making sure that that is um that we have that same kind of format uh for every incident of gun violence that we do right now for every incident of you know for every for every traffic death or or severe traffic injury.

So I'm looking forward to that and looking forward to working with you on that going forward.

Yep.

Thank you.

We're still on first round, Councilman Coghill.

Thank you.

Uh do me a favor, introduce yourself.

Um I work in community um community violence and prevention or community services and violence prevention.

Apologize.

Right.

No, that's that's fine.

I just uh I didn't catch your name.

So Dr.

Sullivan, yeah, I know we might be for that.

Yes.

So I want to echo my colleagues uh comments.

You know, I've had nothing but positive interactions with REACH.

Um, some incidents that have happened in my neighborhood.

Contrary to some of the speakers today.

I don't think anybody on this council wants to discontinue or cancel or you know, the good work that many organizations are doing, even beyond reach, you know.

So uh councilman councilman or President Lavell put the legislation yesterday, I'm sure that's what they were commenting on.

I had conversations with him, that's not his intent either.

But you know, I just want you to know and the public to know I'm very much a fan of what REACH does, and I'm very much a fan of this money being utilized in the way it has been.

I've utilized it.

I've it's been critical for me in certain situations.

And I see it as a very positive thing, and I hope it continues for a long time.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Any further discussion?

First round?

Second round, Councilwoman Cale Smith.

Thank you.

I just um want to do want to mention one thing though.

Um in the contract, is there anything about people uh who are receiving the public dollars, the REACH folks participating in political like, you know, sometimes I've seen a lot of politicking coming from that group.

And I'm just wondering, is there some kind of handle on that?

Because it doesn't seem right that you're getting contracts from the city and then you're you know speaking out for like a a mayor or a race or something like that.

Is there anything in the contract that says you prohibits that?

Um to my knowledge, no, I don't think any city contracts have that.

Um should all have.

There would be some language.

Yeah.

As they finalize the next contract, they could include some of that.

Um I will say this contract does allow for all the staff to no longer be contractors, but they will actually be employees that will receive benefits and things like that.

Um, I'm gonna say there are times when I think that I've seen I've seen you know some comments that are actually inappropriate.

If you're if you're representing the public and working with the public, it's not okay.

And so I'm just gonna say that part.

But I feel that way about a lot of the other you know, I feel this way about all the nonprofits receiving any kind of tax dollars that they shouldn't be doing politicking with it.

And it look because it looks like we're giving them money to put play politics.

And so I think if you really want to be sincere and making sure that we're addressing violence and anti-violence and doing things that to help kids and the people community stay safe, that should be the focus, nothing nothing political.

And I will say some of them have been my biggest supporters, like Christopher Ralph.

So that but that doesn't mean I want him doing something on you know with public dollars.

That's all.

That's it.

I but I do appreciate the work that they do.

And I want to say they show up at every event.

Anytime you invite them to it, they are there.

And and and they like as mentioned, you never know when you're gonna need them, like at that mayor's event.

We never thought the police were everywhere.

We never thought the kids were gonna.

I couldn't believe how they just three separate flights.

It was bad.

Any further discussion?

That's it.

Thank you.

Thank you, guys.

Thank you for your work.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2636, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

That moves us to public works and infrastructure committee chaired by Councilmember Warwick.

To enter into an agreement or agreements with caliber contracting service for costs associated with the construction of the sawmill run salt storage facility and provided for payments not to exceed $6,907,813.31 cent over a period of two years.

Motion to table.

Second discussion.

I just want to say thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Councilmember Wilson.

This is this sorry.

This is the sort of one.

Yeah, that was a request from the administration.

Oh really?

Just to clarify.

Yeah.

On what?

My interrogatory.

Interrogatory.

I don't know much about this.

What's Yeah, so it's a it's a it's a project to demolish.

No, no, I have to do it.

I don't know much about them saying.

Yeah.

Look, I'm only bringing it up because we had a pretty big snowstorm.

And you know, just want to make sure services are being provided.

So can I say before when there was not a salt dome or there was not a facility, they threw tarp over salt.

And if you're throwing if if in a butt time when our budget is in such you know, you know, terrible situation, we have to look at everything.

And to me, spending six million dollars on covering salt was not the priority right now.

I think if there's and so that's with the conversation I had.

As far as the administration, I want to say I thank them and I appreciate that they are stopping it.

And there'll be a time that you can do something with it, I hope, in the event years to come.

But right now, I think throw a tarp over it, put it in one of our other buildings.

We have lots of buildings.

So the next administration will take this up?

I don't know.

I'm sure they're gonna have to do something.

Yeah, because wasn't there a timeline when this structure was like you know done, like it was they were gonna I don't know, just like a house, they would say it's too unsafe to go in.

Yeah, but they can put it other places, yeah.

Okay, other places and they can cover it with a tarp, like they did before.

So it's not as if so if let me just say this, it's not as if the Southwest Pittsburgh won't be covered with you know and have coverage for snow, because they will have places to you know put it and throw tarp.

But we have the facilities in other places too.

And if the director wants to talk about it, it's up to you.

All right.

Huh?

Yeah, me too.

And it's in my district, and so if they want to say, I'm sure they'll take it up if they feel it's ne necessary next year.

And hopefully the incoming mayor is going to come up with some agreement with the nonprofit foundation, you know, community and have a pilot program, so you won't have to worry about funding for things that we don't have.

You'll be able to use some fine funding.

Thank you.

Councilman Coghelm.

Thank you.

Um we've been making a lot of really hard decisions lately.

This is one for me, I will tell you.

It is for me too.

Yeah, I notice.

Um the uh the current salt dome, you know, I can't stand looking at it.

But as far as its condition, um I'm supportive because six million dollars is a lot of money.

I agree with you, and I'm kind of glad you made the initiative to you know look into it.

I was surprised it came over from the administration, I will tell you, but um uh to table it.

But um, but that's fine by me.

I just would like to make sure that moving forward we assess that dome.

You know, I I know they say it's condemned, I know they say it's dangerous, but you know, to me, I'm not you know, I haven't been in there or examined it, but I think we owe it to ourselves just to get an assessment of that dome.

It's gotta be repairable in my eyes, and um, you know, if that costs money, we could put new legislation in to do that.

So that's my only request, but I'm supportive today and thank you for and I think we should also look if you don't mind me I think we should also look for a location that serves the entire area the best.

That was where they had it.

That doesn't mean it has to stay there.

That's all.

Sorry.

Thank you.

Further discussion?

Thank you, Councilman.

Seeing none.

We will need a roll call vote on the motion to table.

Mr.

Charland.

Aye.

Mr.

Coggins.

Aye.

Excuse me.

Ms.

Garros.

Aye.

Mr.

Lavell.

Mr.

Mosley.

Aye.

Miss Kell Smith.

Aye.

Miss Warwick.

Aye.

Mr.

Wilson.

Aye.

Ms.

Strasberger Chair.

Aye.

Ayes nine.

No zero.

Bills tabled.

Thank you.

Thank the administration too.

That moves us to 2583.

Resolution granting a vacation of 8th Street from Penn Avenue to Fort Duquesne Boulevard, the northern portion of Maddox Place, and an unnamed way from 9th Street to its terminus at no cost to the city.

Second Warfirst Council District.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none.

All those in favor.

Sorry.

Yes.

May I?

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'd like to bring up some people from the administration.

Mr.

Gregor?

I thought Mr.

Chintilopoli might be joining us as well.

So council members will remember that we held this for a week.

Which right now there's only a verbal commitment.

But to make sure that there's commitment for public access.

So there was only in the where out whereas clauses language for retaining the public access.

So the language to retain public access was just up at the top in the whereas clauses and was not put into the body of the legislation.

So I brought um I had conversations yesterday again with the mayor's office, and I think that it's an easy fix to retain the spirit of the negotiations.

So I thought, Mr.

Geiger, if you've got something to add.

I don't know if we have finished language in front of us or not.

David Geiger, Legend Policy Director Studio Pittsburgh.

No, I'm not sure if we have final language yet.

Yeah, absolutely.

I'll read for members that what was put in front of us.

Whereas the city wishes to act on the Pittsburgh Cultural Trust request conditioning the proposed vacated area to a public accent easement.

That that was that's in the language that they sent over, but it's only in the whereas clauses.

So it needs to be carried down into the body of the bill.

Um so that the spirit of the negotiations literally the conversations went something like, well, there is a public accent easement, granted.

And like, but uh no, it isn't, it's not in the language.

The conversations went like, well, it's only half of eighth street that is asked to be vacated, and actually, in but the language in front of us is the entirety of eighth street.

Right.

And so it seems like there's confusion that what the intent of both the cultural trust and the city intended just needs actually to be clarified in the body of the of the text.

So I do believe the goodwill was there.

I believe both parties fully intended that either the street not be fully vacated or that there be public accent easement.

So I I just think the council just needs to fix the language.

So I have some suggested language, but again, I don't know that the administration had time.

Did you get received the the language?

Yeah, I reviewed the language that you sent over.

I think it's fine to insert that in there.

So for members, um, I don't have uh copies in front of me, but so as we also were told last week, there are actually already the language that did get into the body of the bill is the language for the four utilities, including Verizon and things like that.

So if we were just to copy that language to add the city and public access, then that would be you know parallel language or something like that.

So we would read something like the City of Pittsburgh reserves the right for a public accent easement in order to maintain access to pedestrians and public safety vehicles through the proposed vacation section of 8th Street.

The City of Pittsburgh requires a public access easement, which is like all capitalized because it's a legal term.

An easement agreement for pedestrian public safety access is required to execute the proposed vacation.

Sounds a little you know redundant to me.

So I think we want to let the attorneys um fix that, but um I don't know.

But um I don't know, you know, there's really if I don't have the amendment in front of me to vote on, then there's nothing for us to vote on.

Again, we can still do this final vote by the end of December.

If you'd like to just have the law department take a look at that language, so we could bring it back again Monday the 22nd for provisional vote.

If members are comfortable.

I don't know if you have questions.

Here's some additional comments.

Um Councilman Wilson, followed by Councilwoman Kale Smith.

Okay.

Um I did have a few conversations about this, and I know we spoke yesterday.

Uh and then um I did follow up with uh some people from the uh you know from the public safety department and everything.

So it I mean from the cultural trust standpoint, they did put this in the packet and they did meet with public safety, so the road will be um rated for emergency vehicles.

So my um my confusion lies here.

Is there a um where is the language that you're saying that you think should be in here?

Interrogatory, please.

Uh sorry, yeah, if you don't mind.

The um on the top of the legislation in the whereas clauses.

Okay.

It says that there should be a condition for the proposed vacated area to have public access usement.

But that doesn't count if it's in the whereas clauses.

So if that's the intent, then it just needs to be put into the body of the bill.

And the body of the bill already includes the language for the public uh for the access for the utilities.

So on page three um section three.

Okay.

You know, pittsburgh water, I still say the legal name should be DPW uh uh PWSA.

You know, reserves the right for utility easement, and then it has the language about what their easement.

And then it says people's gas reserves the right for utility easement, and then it has the details.

And then it has the new paragraph.

Duke Light reserves the right for utility easement and it has the language, and then it says Verizon returns the right.

And so this is in our legislation.

And so what I think is that they just didn't put City of Pittsburgh reserves the right for public access easement, as was it clearly intended in the whereas clauses.

It's like everyone thought that it was included because it was in the whereas clauses, but actually needs to be in the body where the other ones are.

So it's a very, very simple fix.

Um I don't know who can answer this, but will the um well putting that that text in the in the body of the bill, will that prevent it from being private property?

Oh, it's private property.

That's correct.

It would be private property, it would still go to the cultural trust they could do everything that you mentioned your understanding matches my understanding, which is that the cultural trust engage with public safety extensively around the design of like the the roadway, the path that would exist where the current street exists, that that would be constructed in a manner uh that would allow for access of fire trucks or EMS if there was an emergency or if needed.

So yeah, I I think we're all on the same page.

I think that um inserting the language in there ensures that an easement is recorded for that purpose and that the public would retain an easement across what would become private property.

Okay.

But if they want to I mean, I'm not worried about an emergency vehicle shouldn't getting in there.

That's that's critical to public safety for those buildings.

My only concern is that if for some reason they just like we close down our park after a certain time.

You know, park.

We're not a lot in there.

I don't know, like right now we've got hundreds of different rules, but you know I I think I understand where you're saying.

Um which would authorize then the cultural trust and the the city to enter into this agreement.

There's no reason why that agreement we wouldn't ask the cultural trust, nor would I expect the cultural trust to agree to allow public access beyond what is considered reasonable in similar park spaces across the city.

Okay.

All right.

Okay, thanks.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Kale Smith.

So I just wanted to do with the council president, because this is his district.

I just didn't know what to do.

That's my district.

Yeah.

Oh, it's your district.

Oh, I apologize.

And you're good with this.

And you're good.

I think we're making them a little bit big of a deal of it.

You know, no offense.

But that's just my plain language.

That's just my plain language in this whole situation.

But you know.

I mean, what is your wishes?

I just wondered what your wish was.

That's all.

I just want this to happen.

So I don't think this really prevents any sort of any sort of thing.

I'm gonna be honest because I my mind was made up when I hit when I heard it and then I heard her councilwoman.

What I would say is that you know, it if the councilman's desire is to see this move forward.

I do think actually inserting language like this will allow it to move forward quicker, as mentioned before, you know, public safety engaged in conversations with the cultural trust about the design of that space to make sure they could access it with you know fire and EMS.

Um we really do need to formalize that public easement and not just rely on sort of verbal conversations between two parties.

And so without that public easement being authorized, it would hold it up actually.

I'm gonna just want to make sure he was good.

That's all because it's his district.

So I can motion for um language change now.

Um, I have some language in front of me if the clerk can do a verbal amendment.

Is it the same language that James emailed?

Yeah.

I can use that.

Yeah.

Okay.

Okay.

So why don't we do that and then we'll give people time to look at it before Tuesday?

And and that would speed it up a week.

Are you gonna read it?

So we know what we're doing.

I did.

Yeah, I can read it again.

So may I, Madam Chair?

No, the one you just read?

Okay.

Okay.

I'm sorry.

I'm not sure who has the floor, honestly.

There notion has not been made.

Uh sack around Councilman Wilson, if there's further discussion.

Uh so do you think it's necessary to put the line about that it's still private property in that line.

I think if we're agreeing to vacate the street and sell it to the cultural trust, selling it to a private entity makes it private property.

I don't see a reason why you couldn't include language to clarify that it's private property with a public easement over top of it.

I just it's not necessarily required, it would be redundant.

You wouldn't need a public easement over public property.

That's but you you could certainly insert that language, it wouldn't hold up or inhibit us from being able to move forward.

So if that makes folks more comfortable, I don't see why language like that couldn't be inserted.

Correct.

I I don't think that point is unclear in the legislation at all.

Like we're vacating a public right-of-way to provide it to a private entity.

So I think that that's clear, and I'm not sure off the top of my head and without the full legislative text in front of me exactly where you would insert language like that, but I don't see any reason why that couldn't be inserted.

Yeah, so what does this language do then?

The language that the councilwoman is proposing authorizes and requires that the cultural trust and the city of Pittsburgh enter into a public easement agreement to allow for pedestrian and emergency vehicle access across that part of the park.

Which is consistent with the city's understanding of the project.

And it is reflected in as the councilwoman pointed out, it's reflected in the whereas clause.

So it's clear that parties are of this understanding.

However, it was not carried down.

I don't know who drafted the legislation, but that part was not carried down into section three actually requiring it.

So it would the public does need an easement across the property if we're going to sell it to a private entity.

So it would slow things down to not include entering into the public easement.

Okay.

So we have we've we've uh exhausted second round.

We have a motion by Councilwoman Gross.

Motion to amends by verbal amendments.

I need a second.

Second.

Thank you.

Um Madam Clerk the a new paragraph beneath the paragraph that starts with Verizon reserves the right for utility easement.

So new paragraph with similar formatting.

The city of Pittsburgh reserves the right for public access easements.

With a colon, and I will send this to the clerk as well.

In order to maintain access to pedestrians and public safety vehicles through the proposed vacation section of 8th Street.

The City of Pittsburgh requires a public access easement.

Period.

New sentence.

So it's it's very similar to all of the language.

That's that ends that, Madam Chair.

It's very similar to it copies the language that the utilities already have.

Uh but it applies to to above ground.

We have a motion and the second discussion on the motion for their discussion.

Seeing none, all those in v favor of the verbal amendment, please indicate by saying aye.

Motion passes.

Discussion on the bill as amended.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2583 as amended, please indicate by saying aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

New papers bill 2623.

Thanks.

Resolution authorizing the mayor and the director of the Office of Management and Budget and the Director of the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure to enter into an agreement or agreements with the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources for the purpose of receiving grant funds and the amount of 44,600 to repave a portion of the South Side Trail.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2623, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 2624.

Resolution amending resolution 485 of 2025, which authorized the mayor and director of department of public works to enter into an amended agreement or agreements with Studio Zoo for costs associated with the Homewood Park Construction Project by increasing the total spend by 48,000 for a new total not to exceed 2 million eight 89,008 and 30 cent.

Motion to approve.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2624, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

That moves us to land use and economic development committee chaired by Councilman Wilson.

Deferred paper, Bill 2333.

Resolution providing for the designation as a historic site under Title 11 of the Code of Ordinances.

That's certain structure known as a police station number three, also known as the Office of Municipal Investigations at 2603 Penn Avenue, located in the strip district neighborhood in a second war city of Pittsburgh.

The owner of the property supports the nomination, and there is no cost to the city.

Motion to approve the discussion.

Second.

Second discussion, Councilman Wilson.

Thank you.

Appreciate all the work that's went into this.

So it was good to hear about what the you know the significance of it.

And honestly, myself just looking at it, I'm not seeing it.

But that's besides the point.

Um that I like to see here is for the process that we first started with the URA for them to um, and this is something they agree with as well, for them to uh let the RFP happen to see you know what who the applicants are and what the project details are and to have a fully effective um you know, like a robust uh conversation about that, especially about the applications.

Uh you know, I'm asking that we uh vote no on this historic designation so that we can uh see what type of project we can get in this area.

Councilwoman Cale Smith.

I just want to say um I appreciate that you know you want to see what you can do with the building first because you know how many it's been almost I think 14-15 years since we designated the old stone tavern, you know, as um historic and has taken so long and so much money.

It's the second oldest building in the city of Pittsburgh, and there's just not a lot of help, um, financial help to make sure that they're preserving these buildings.

And thankfully somebody purchased it who's trying to do something with it, but still again, he doesn't have a lot of help.

So I'm supportive of you know whatever you want to do at your district, but um I think when we're designating things as historic there there has to be some conversations about how we're gonna what we're going to do within a certain time frame.

So people aren't just looking at blight in their communities.

Thank you, Councilwoman Gross.

Thank you.

Um I'm supportive of the nomination.

Um and I mean I think most members have driven through the strip district and seen the billions and billions of dollars, literally multiple billions of dollars of investment that is gone on to you know basically every street corner in the entire district, right?

So, you know, a couple billion dollars with a B of office development, a couple billion dollars with a B of residential development.

There are million dollar townhouses selling less than a block away.

Um, you know, over I think they've reached over a million dollars.

And um I find it sad that we don't protect our city's history.

And this is this just to as a reminder, this this is a building that belongs to the city.

And um it is a historic police precinct, it's an adorable historic building in the heart of the strip.

And I find that like erasing parts of ourselves is just disrespect to ourselves and our history and our people.

And that protecting these places that are memory kind of and reminders of who we are and where we came from, we should be proud of.

Um and to not respect those parts of ourselves where we are and where we came from is just you know a lack of self-esteem.

Um and the result if we don't protect and claim our own history is that we're just blandifying and homogenizing and really becoming a city that looks and smells and walks like a duck, which you know what I'm saying, is just like every other place, right?

You just if we don't keep the parts of ourselves that identify ourselves in our history, um, we could, you know, we'll look like a city that was just thrown up yesterday.

And I don't believe that that is what our constituents and our residents want from us.

I do believe that we don't need to take these across the board ideological positions that we should just build everywhere, everything all the time.

Um that we can be we can have a we could be a little bit judicious and say, like, okay, this one corner in the strip district doesn't actually need a multimillion dollar new structure on it.

Or in fact, I think there even would be air rights if it needed to be, right?

If we absolutely were so desperate that this corner also needed to be developed, it wouldn't be that hard to just go ahead and develop up because I think I don't even know what the um what the height requirements is there, but I bet it's at least 60 feet.

Um so uh I I ask members to vote yes on this today.

Um if in the future there really is no more vacant lots in your district, if in the future every single storefront on every single main street in your district is already developed and run out of space, then sure, we could come back and revisit the corner of 26th and Penn that houses a storic facility that the city owns and should be protecting.

But today I would request that you just vote yes because there still are vacc lots of vacant properties in your districts that could be developed, maybe not as many in district seven or in district eight, um, that should have the priority, and I think we'll have the priority if we don't get distracted by um thinking that we need to literally that that the every inch of the strip district needs to come first before your districts.

So I'm voting yes today.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

Further discussion, first round?

Sackerbound Councilman Wilson.

Um I just wanted to clarify something.

So uh, you know, while I appreciate the narrative of millionaires taking over everything, the reason why this RFE started started in the first place was because there was an app of school program.

Uh someone that runs out of school program, they're looking for a building.

And so I just think even in that case, um, so anyway, I told that individual.

I said, you know, look, we really need to do an RFP here.

Um, you know, I just can't I don't want to be like, you know, involved in the politics of who gets the property, you know, what the best use is, but um I know the name to them.

So then um so yeah, so I think even you know, with an after school program, if they were selected, uh they would be, you know, and I don't know if they'd ever be able to get off the ground if it wasn't any historic.

So thank you.

Uh I love that.

Um I love that.

I also when I represented this strip, um, had people who were will interested in leasing the property um that were nonprofits that needed space and the strip district would have been a great match at the time because of the offices and the technology.

It was like a technology training workforce program for underemployed um young people.

Um but then COVID happened, so that those programs kind of got just set aside.

Um so I think it's a great match, and so I would recommend that the city lease it to an you know an operation like that, doesn't need to go to the URA, doesn't need to go out to our RFP, doesn't need to go to bid.

Um we have leases with nonprofits like the zoo, like the libraries, um, like the Hispanic Development Center and Beachview that are in city properties, it's a great fully supportive, and then we'd be in the position to help them and make sure that they were able to navigate the historic um process, which does not prevent you from making changes, definitely doesn't prevent you from using the building.

Um and it'd be that would be a lovely partnership.

So I appreciate that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

Further discussion, uh Councilmember Warwick.

So I'm a little bit of like two minds on this issue because maybe the maybe the issue is that the the concept of historic designation needs needs a rebrand.

I don't know if that's so I and I will say I have a building in Hazelwood, uh the old Hazelwood Library.

Which it no, I uh yeah, I mean I understand it's it's a different neighborhood, it's a different building.

Uh but this is a building that has been um just left to disinter just deteriorate by the city, the roof, you know, and and and I'm gonna bind because I, you know, the the community desperately needs like 150K to get a match grant to literally just put a bag over the roof so that the building doesn't become completely uh unsalvageable.

And um I had somebody who was interested potentially, I mean this was all just conversations, but I had there was somebody who was interested in um in the building for you know, like an Islamic community center type thing, and we looked at the building multiple times, and um the historic designation was just like it was like a a showstopper for them.

Even though we had conversation, right?

And it was and it was like should we um could we do a tin roof?

Could we do right like because there were things that that this person wanted to be able to do quickly and cost effectively, right?

Like that and he and did not want uh uh historic designation, and it was made very clear on the calls that it didn't affect the inside necessarily, it only affected the outside, and that the Historic Review Commission was eager, very eager to get this building, you know, into the hands of someone who had a project for it, and and in spite of all that, all those assurances, um it still felt like a showstopper.

Um I don't really know what the what the solution is.

But I but I also would like to know does the would the historic designation stop the building from being torn down?

And I know that we talked about this building as something that um you know, when we gave I mean, because it is in the strip district, and this is like a very high value property.

And you know, I I I am not necessarily the the lover of you know, holding on to something that we're not using just to hold on to it, if we could have made I don't know four million dollars off selling it, but we decided not to do that, right?

We decided to give it to the URA and and and not do that.

So I don't know.

I am definitely of two minds.

I don't know if there's any additional information or clarity around the future use.

But yeah, if it's an after-school program that's just worried about being able to make, you know, make um some renovations to the building.

But if it's a question of like, well, can we just sell this and have it torn down and put up a giant condo, I understand the concern there too.

Anyway, I'll leave it at that.

Councilwoman Cale Smith, please.

I just want to say I I understand what Councilwoman Gross is saying about our preserving our history in the city because my family actually was one of the families that was displaced from the Hill District when they tore down our house for the arena and they tore down our business for the arena.

So I've lived that my entire life, so I definitely understand that.

And then recently they just tore down our second business, which after they after they tried to reinvent themselves and do something different, they opened a bar down on Fifth Avenue.

It was later called Kenny's Place, but for 50 years it was our family's bar.

And um, and they just recently tore that down, but it actually has a really good use, you know, coming forward.

I really wish that what we would do is get some kind of, and I don't know if we have this, it'd be good to know if we have um some kind of um analysis of what buildings could be so you know saved, working with the community, what's what's what's important for their history, and then where resources are so that we can actually help do some things to preserve those buildings because that's the biggest thing.

We have a lot of people that nominate stuff, but not a lot of people that fund stuff.

And so it would be great if you're to get some funding in for some of those uh facilities because I would love to see I I go down Fifth Avenue and I don't I mean I don't even recognize it.

Right now, my family lived on Fifth and Robinson, the corner there, Fifth Avenue, um, as I got older.

I mean that's where I was born and raised.

And when you come around the bend, there's a big apartment building now for the University of Pittsburgh.

Well, when I was young, that was a chicken farm.

So when I see this kind of stuff, it's very different.

So I would love to see something preserving some of that stuff.

But at the same time, this is not my district, and I do understand um that there's a good need uh or good use for it and good plan for it.

And I and I trust Councilman Wilson is gonna do what's best for his district.

So that's it.

Thank you.

For their second round, third round, Councilwoman Gross.

Thank you.

We certainly have covered a lot of this territory in the 12 years that I've been at this table.

Um, but I'll remind her that this is city property.

So we do have, I think, uh good policy discussions to be had around private property and nominations, right?

Um and members who had reservations about historic nominations of private property have always made sure that uh we have in the record whether the owner is supportive, right?

Um so again, this is city property, so this is not that.

Um and I also believe that we are in terms of city properties, we don't need to keep doing things like it's still 1995 or 1985, and um hand over facilities like the Hazelwood Library to the URA, which is what is being proposed for this building.

We don't need to do that to then beg a private developer to redevelopment, redevelop those properties, right?

This one is in the heart of the strip.

I have always argued that of the city-owned properties in the strip, we're going to need those facilities, right?

We can't purge all of our facilities, even when they're warehouses, even when there's something like the 10-acre tow pound, um, that we also we need functioning city areas for city operations in various parts of the city, and it's become a challenge for our city back end operations.

But additionally, even if we want another function in city-owned property, we know how to do that.

We don't have to privatize it and sell it off to private operators in order to have it house some nonprofit, especially half of child care centers these days are nonprofits, half are for-profits, but to even have a small business, especially a child care provider be that'd be a wonderful match for this building, um, since there are so many kids and also again um work destinations.

People like to have their kids sometimes near their offices if they're at the office all day.

Um so this is a great location for that.

It's so I would say that it's a perfect match for the historic nomination, and it also really calls into question why we would be then giving it away to the URA for dollar.

Um so when we could just directly lease it out.

I also believe that the time has come since we are a reminder for 15 years we weren't able to borrow even a single dollar.

Um and these years, our capital um budgets are over a hundred million, maybe not this year, but I think last year's was a hundred, hundred and twenty.

Right?

And we borrowed to pay for those capital projects.

If some small part of that, like for example, like the fire stations that we've been doing, because those are city-owned facilities and they really needed to be reheat rehabilitated for employees' safety.

Um those are funds that we borrow in order to do those.

If this building needs to be stabilized because it's got a roof or it needs to be rewired, or there's some plumbing issue, that can be done as a municipally owned building under bond because it is a long-term asset.

And I would be really in favor of that.

And if I could go back in time and we would keep the Hazelwood Library and stabilize that roof with city bond, that would have been the much better outcome.

And keep it as a city facility, and then you could just be leasing it out to people, which is revenue that we use.

This is how other cities operate.

We act like we can't do that because we're losing half our population.

Well, that's not true anymore.

Right?

We are stable, we're financially stable.

Yes, we're having some crunch in our operating budget, we're gonna work on that this year.

Uh but we don't need we've already purged enough.

We don't need to keep purging these facilities.

We can actually keep revenue on them and also protect them historically.

So again, I would ask members to vote yes on this.

It's not gonna preclude any good use of this building.

And trust me, there is there's a developer who's gonna demolish the build.

In a blink of an eye.

That's all I have, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

Councilmember Warwick.

So I guess this is interrogatory for Councilman Wilson.

I mean, is that would it seem like if we had held on to the building, then we wouldn't even need like this historic designation wouldn't have arisen.

But is I mean if there is so if there's an organization that is looking to use the building, like lease the building, renovate, whatever they need to do, and they don't want to deal with historic designation, would would there be a world where we just held on to the building and did a lease, whether it was a lease that you know, a cost effective lease for them or even leasing it out at a more profitable price point at some time?

I think we have an irogatory.

So can you clarify you're asking me why don't we just hold and run it out someone?

I'm saying, would you feel comfortable not like not getting rid of it and then not doing a ho uh uh because it it seems to me that the concern with a historic designation is that the building gets sold and torn down, right?

But we could keep it, but as as a like we if if we kept it as a city, we could leave I mean this is in a place, I mean, after school program is great, you can lease a building for a dollar to a to a community group.

You can also lease a building for market rate to whoever wants to be in the building.

And usually with a lease, or not not usually, but often with a lease like a retail lease, you know, part of it, the person the the organization comes in and does the renovations that they need to put in their like store or whatever it is that they're wanting to do.

I started the process that the community wanted, which was to have this uh, you know, go into an RFP process.

So we can receive applications on the URA side.

So that this was this came out from the I'm at that's what I'm asking, is how did this come to be like how did it come come to be?

With the the community group asked us to sell the building.

Uh the community group was involved with uh at least one person that came to them and had interest in it.

And that was someone else that you know I said, look, the proper way to do this, which is what we've done in you know, in other parts of my district, is to route us through the URA so that they have a capability to do the RFP process that would I think would be the best for the community because the community is involved.

There's multiple stakeholders that are involved in that committee that make the decision on who will be uh purchasing the property.

And I mean, does the person who wants to purchase the property do they want to tear it down?

You're asking a question, I don't know.

We don't know.

Okay.

I don't know.

Further discussion.

Seeing none, we will take a roll call vote.

Mr.

Charlotte.

No.

Mr.

Coghu.

No.

Ms.

Crows.

Aye.

Mr.

Lavell.

No.

Mr.

Mosley.

Abstain.

Ms.

Kale Smith.

No.

Miss Warwick.

Abstain.

Mr.

Wilson.

No.

Ms.

Strasberger Chair.

No.

Ayes one.

No six.

Two abstention.

Bill filled.

We will now move on to Bill 2385.

Ordinance amending the Pittsburgh Code Title IX Zoning Code, Article 5, Use Regulations, Chapter 911, Primary Uses to add a definition for waste transfer station and standards associated with the use.

Motion to um sorry.

So we have the report motion to approve discussion.

Yeah, just motion to hold for public hearing.

We have a motion to hold for public hearing.

We have a second discussion.

Seeing none.

All those in favor of holding Bill 2385 for public hearing, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Bill be held.

Bill 2467.

Introduction and establishment chapter 902 zoning districts in general.

Section 90201.

Establishment of zoning districts by adding a new specially planned district at subsection 90201 D2 to be identified as SP 13.

West End Trolley Trail Accessory Parking District at Article 4 Planning Districts.

Chapter 909 Plan Development Districts.

Section 90901 SP Specially Plan District by creating a new district to be identified as SP 13.

West End Trolley Trail Accessory Parking District, including rules and regulations, and by amending the City of Pittsburgh zoning map by changing accessory parking standards in UI and LNC to SP 13, West End Trolley Truck Accessory Parking District for property consisting of lots between Free Walt Street, the West End Trolley Trail Gateway along McCartney Street, Green Tree Road, and portions of Wharton Street, Woodville Avenue, McKnight Street, and Wabash Street as further identified in the attached map and in more detail within the bill below, all located within the 20th ward.

Motion to uh motion to hold for two hold for two weeks.

Right?

Yeah.

Can we just do one and because I'm not sure if you somebody send me a checks now?

But okay, motion to hold one week.

Just motion to hold is there a second?

Second.

Second discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of holding bill 2467 for one week, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Bill be held.

Bill 2526.

Resolution authorizing the mayor and the director of the Office of Management and Budget to enter into an agreement or agreements with Paramount Pursuits LLC for technical assistance services to nonprofits awarded neighborhood economic development grants in need of capacity building for some not to exceed 41,000 for the payment of the cost through.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Just briefly you do.

I I want to thank the uh DC C D C D team, yeah, uh, for helping me with this.

Um you know, I I know that I I held this last week or maybe two weeks ago, um, because my group had received this uh award previously, um uh working through with what um what was helpful to them as well as uh knowing that you know this is not as big there are actually five different groups that are receiving this amount here.

Um I'm happy to to you know support us today and move this forward.

Um and I I want to thank you know Kelly and the team for um trying to to make this a little bit more productive um in future years in in the services that we're giving for these capacity grant winners for the uh for the net grant.

So um thank you guys.

I don't I don't need to bring you to the table, but if other people have my questions, they might you further discussion seeing none, all those in favor of bill 2526, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

New papers, Bill 2626.

Resolution authorizing the mayor, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the director of city planning to close out a Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Community Conservation Partnerships Program grant agreement which provided funding to help develop the Hill District Parks Master Plan.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2626, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 2627.

Resolution authorizing the mayor and the director of the Office of Management and Budget to apply for grant funding from the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development, local share accounts statewide to provide funding for the construction of a park in Bedford dwellings.

The grant proposal includes an ask of $1 million for this stated purpose.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of 2627, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation, Bill 2628.

Resolution authorizing the mayor and the director of the Office of Management and Budget to apply for grant funding from the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development's local share accounts statewide to provide funding for the expansion of Pittsburgh's bike share programs POGO.

The grant proposal includes an ask of up to $841,865.

Motion to approve.

Discussion?

Yep.

Seeing none.

I do.

Yes.

Yeah.

Just quickly.

So I'm of course supportive of applying for this grant.

Um I do want to say one thing about Pogo and about our foundations and our large nonprofits.

So I am of the opinion we we talk a lot about transportation in the city of Pittsburgh, right?

And how hard it is to get around this city when you don't have a car, right?

And specifically how hard it is for our young people to get around to school, to work, right?

To to recreate, get between neighborhoods.

You know, the PRT bus system obviously is not within our purview, right?

We can't, you know, but this program is these pogo bikes, now that they are e-bikes, right?

And you can be, and they can, you know, you can go up and down hills basically with them.

Um they're not certainly not for everyone, right?

You know, I'm uh your your average 65, 70 year old is probably not jumping on a pogo bike, but young people use if anybody can you it used to be a few people, and now that we have more of them around the city, you see all types of people riding these pogo bikes.

They are very, very popular.

And they are incredibly useful, you know, downtown the the docking station is empty, right?

At five, you know, at 5 p.m.

It's hard to get one, right?

And um so the more of these bikes that we can get around the city, uh the easier it will be for young people to get around the city and get to work and get to school, and that is economic development, right?

Transportation is quite and this is something that we can do.

So while these grants are great, they're very limited, right?

Like eight hundred you know, eight hundred and forty thousand.

That's that's a uh uh uh some POGO stations, right?

But that doesn't get us so my understanding from meeting with with uh the director of Pogo, David White, and this may be like two years ago now, so was that for 40 million dollars we could have a pogo station within a five-minute walk of every home in Pittsburgh and Wilkinsburg, right?

And I know that sounds like a big number, but it's actually not that big a number, and it's a one-time because once the station is there, what the once the bikes are there, um you know, Pogo made right the subscriptions and and all of that, you know, maintains the service.

The RK Mellon Foundation could make a one-time investment.

Like they they are an economic development, like that is their mission is economic development in Pittsburgh.

They could make a one-time investment to have these bikes all over the city, and they would have, I would argue, more impact on the economic well-being of the people of Pittsburgh than any investment they've made.

And they've made lots of investments.

I don't want to criticize, right?

They they give a lot.

They give a lot to Pittsburgh and to our oops to our um local um you know educational institutions, right?

But with a one-time investment, and it, you know, between and I I'm I'm fairly certain that Heinz has been generous with Pogo, if I'm if if I'm correct.

These bikes are where it's at.

These bikes are what turn this city into a pla you know, like a modern, you know world class city, right?

Like a New York City-style city, Chicago, right?

The cities in Europe where people get around by bikes, because if you make the bikes available, young people will use them.

If you make them available, young people because they're already using them in big numbers where they are available.

So that means that you know, my oldest kids are are 13 right now, right?

If we could get these bikes everywhere in the city by the time they are 16 and they're starting to make the the decision, oh gosh, do I do I drive?

Do I have you know what do I do?

They will be cyclists.

And we don't have to worry about strong arming older folks into into accepting uh uh bicycles as as a way of life.

It's something that will happen organically through the generations.

I cannot say how how how strongly I believe in these pogo bikes and their ability to completely transform the city of Pittsburgh.

Um I'll just leave it at that.

So very supportive of this grant.

I wish we had far more money.

And I think that this would be a good investment, whether it's AHN, which actually started the program, I think, right?

And invest already.

Uh UPMC, RK Mel, and hot, you name it.

This bikes are the thing that will transform our city.

If we have someone who will invest in them to do so.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilman Cockhill.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um to a large extent I I agree with you, Councilwoman Warwick.

And I I'll tell you that I've been so disappointed.

Um this goes back probably five years.

I've been talking to David.

I said, I want those bikes in my district, you know.

And you know, I mean, I suggested the parks.

And in my district, we can't we can't ride a bike in the downtown Pittsburgh, which is unfortunate.

I I believe if we could, we would have had them a long time ago.

Um 51, Route 51 is kind of the great divide.

And you know, there is no safe way across it.

The only safe way across it was a bridge that went into the Wabash tunnel, which they pulled down and demolished, so that's no longer an option.

We would have to build a bridge over it.

But I'm not really looking for that.

That's extremely expensive.

And you could ride downtown.

I shouldn't say you couldn't.

You could go up Warrington Avenue up through Southside, down 18th Street, and you know it's a good thing.

Yeah, well that's thank you.

That is why I'm promoting, and that's what I was promoting for I'm telling you it goes back five years now.

I've sat with David, I had them in my district.

It's using them to get to transportation, right?

I have the T line coming through my district and all over my district through Overbrook through Beachview through everywhere.

So but people in Brooklyn have to rely on bus service.

So uh I would very much like to revisit that.

And uh, you know, for some reason it falls on deaf airs with me, I think, and maybe I I I I can't say for sure.

We do not, I don't say this proudly, but there is not one bike lane in the fourth city council district.

I believe it's the only part of the city that our only district in the city does not have a bike lane, and I'm not advocating for bike lanes necessary, but I am advocating for the pogo bikes.

You know, so I don't know if that's the if that's what's holding them back.

I uh when I talked to them years ago, there's they said that's it's not a problem, you know.

They there was no requirement that you had to have a bike lane in order to have the station.

So any help you can give me on that, you know.

I already have the locations, it could be a Brooklyn Community Center and Moore Park, and this serves Brookline mostly, and that allows them to get to the T on in Beach View and Overbrook, which would be ideal.

And it is your own risk there, um, you know, for the time being.

And you know, but you know, perhaps if we had them, we might even more seriously consider bike lanes.

But but no, I I I've been out of advocating for them.

Again, I've been nothing but disappointed with Pogo.

They said, you know, we'll revisit it, we'll we'll come out, we're gonna, you know, give us a place, we'll show us where you want them.

Nothing.

Crickets.

So if you can help advocate, I would really appreciate that.

I feel like you have their errors more so than I do.

And um, yeah, I would like to see them in my district to be honest with you.

It's a you know, it's a it's an asset.

I mean, it it's it's taxpayer dollars or taxpayer dollars paying for this.

Yeah.

This is great.

Well it's disagreeable.

Right, right.

But either way, I'm sure taxpayer dollars are involved in one way or another.

And we want that service.

And I've been asking for it.

And again, I'm very disappointed.

And uh I'll call David and try one more time, but I I think if you're at the table with me, I'll have a little more success.

So thanks.

Thank you.

Second round, Councilwoman Warwick.

Yeah, so I just want to just underscore, yeah.

I mean, I don't speak for Pogo, but you know, is is the issue is funding, right?

Like the issue is funding.

And so I mean there's no there's no pogo station in Squirrel Hill either, right?

And and that is the thing, and I I've I've you know I've talked with Pogo too and wanting to get a station up in Glen Hazel and one by Alderdice so that we can get kids starting to, you know what I mean, use those bikes.

So and that is why I'm making the appeal, that is why, and maybe I'll do a will of counsel or something like that, but really like making the appeal to our foundations in particular, right, who are focused on economic development, that to me this is this is where it's at, right?

This is how we make people and and also green it right, reducing the number of cars and and all that all that good stuff that that will make our city a better place to live.

Um so yeah, happy to work with you on that, Councilman.

But um I know that it's it's one of those things, right?

Everybody wants a pogo, but they are uh they are a small nonprofit and they're bound by I mean it it sounds like you know, eight hundred and forty-one thousand sounds like a big grant, but it's not, right?

Like it's it's that's just a handful of stations in a big city.

Uh but I will say the places where they are already.

Um, you know, Oakland, downtown, um I think they probably have some councilwoman in your district, right?

Not everywhere, but where they have them, people use them.

Yeah, yeah.

Thank you.

I add interrogatory?

Interrogatory.

Okay.

I I would just say to that, you're you're absolutely right.

I I believe if they put two in Brookline, um, they'd probably be their busiest busiest stations, uh I I would venture to say.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Gross.

Um thank I just wanted to say that I concur and we are lucky to have some pogo stations.

Um so you get to see them on the road um frequently, right?

I think it really has improved people's access to be able to get around by bike, to be able to have the electric bikes, because we have a hilly district, like a lot of some districts are hillier than others, but that makes a really fundamental difference.

And I'll just throw at throw in that it also prevents or really I think reduces those neighborhoods in your district from being destinations if there's no station.

Because you you have to keep paying if the bike isn't docked.

So while you could hypothetically, you know, go from Bloomfield to Squirrel Hill as a destination, you'd be on the clock the whole time because you couldn't dock the bike.

So you need to have those docks.

I think at the the business districts, listen the kids and the young people really like to visit our main streets, right?

And we want to encourage them to do so.

I mean, I've got even you know, school age teenagers, and they want to they get out and about um through multiple city neighborhoods themselves with their friends these days, and a lot of times they're on bicycle, like you know, sometimes they're fit enough to do a non-electric bicycle, which is great.

But um, I think we would really improve our you know be another way to get our main streets as destinations if we're able to expand this network of e-bikes because it really stops you from from using them.

You know, some places again where you're um where we live, if they if the teenagers arrive to our house on an pogo bike, used to be healthy ride.

Um, you know, then they're like, well, we have to leave, we have to leave, we have to leave because we have to we have to go back like a mile away to dock the bike.

Right?

And so sometimes they'll they're having to do that, like they arrive at at our house on bike, but then they have to take the bike back a mile away and then walk back a mile to get back to the house.

So um, you know, that's only 15 minutes and they're young, but it does reduce the number of people who weren't going to take advantage of the system.

Um so I again I just wanted to chime in and say it really does help to have those for the for the the stations to be at destinations.

Um but uh also to just concur that we do need to expand um the residential network as well.

So I appreciate it.

That's all my chair.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'd like to call Chief Cornell to the table.

I think this is I agree with everything everyone said.

Um and just to kind of put a finer point on what this local share account application will help to offset.

It sounds like it's more uh more funding than we're talking about at the table here.

Yeah, thanks.

Uh Patrick Cornell, Chief Financial Officer.

Um so this is actually um a local match for a CMAC grant, the congestion congestion and management of air quality um that routes through the SPC.

So this is actually um $800,000 is a 20% match for $3.2 million in federal dollars, right?

So it's a four million dollar project for POGO's phase three expansion.

Um and this, you know, the SBC approved our CMAC award using in-kind dollars from Domi staff and POGO staff.

Um, but going after this local share grant could just free up, you know, even more dollars to go towards the project itself.

Um so we're really excited about it.

Um I think phase four is where things in in districts two and four really start to pick up.

Um I think you need just taking a picture of me.

I think you need almost um partnerships with the other municipalities, right?

On our end of Beachview, if you get a docking station in Dormont that allows people to access Potomac Station.

So things like that, but this is just one part of a larger four million dollar project.

So we're we're very excited.

Councilman Conkham.

Pogo goes outside the city?

Uh right now they do not.

So if you had a bike, but they're willing to.

I I believe that is what they're exploring for future.

I think Dormont, Mount Lebanon would be willing and enthusiastic partners if that's the case.

I really do.

You take the T.

I know it's not a problem for you because you live in Beachview and you're right there.

But I'm sure you agree with me.

You know, Brookline has the bus, which is it's good service, but you know, I think that people would utilize it from Brooklyn to Beachview or Brookline to Overbrook on a like I said, uh I think it'd be a very busy, busy station, just two of them.

That's all I'm asking for.

So um, yeah, I would yeah, no, it will yeah, we'll we'll hook up with district two too eventually.

Yeah.

All right, no, thank thank you, Patrick.

Thank you.

All right.

All those in favor of Bill 2628, please indicate by saying aye.

I've got affirmative recommendation.

Thank you.

Bill 2629.

Resolution authorizing the mayor and the director of the Office of Management and Budget to apply for grant funding from the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development, local share account statewide to provide funding to purchase a pumper fire truck.

The grant proposal includes an ask of one million dollars for this stated purpose.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2629, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Moves us to recreation, youth, and senior services committee chaired by councilwoman Cale Smith.

Bill 2608 resolution authorizing the mayor and the director of parks and recreation on behalf of the City of Pittsburgh to enter into financial and in-kind sponsorship agreements valued at $10,000 or less for the City Park's Office of Special Events 2026 season at no cost to the city.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2608, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 2609.

Resolution authorizing the mayor and the Department of Parks and Recreation to enter into a facility usage agreement or agreements with Bell Silver Consensus Group and Voices Against Violence for use of the McKinley Recreation Center, located at 144 Amesbury Street and Warrington Recreation Center, located at 329 East Warrington Avenue, in order to provide recreational and community focused activities for a term of five years at no cost to the city.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Just for brief discussion.

It'll be brief.

Good afternoon, Director.

Good.

Thank you.

Thank you.

First of all, thank you for all your work for the city of Pittsburgh.

Second, um, just I'm curious.

You know, a lot of these groups and some are ones in my district.

But I remember when I first was cheering Fox Rec a while back, or when I was had some concerns before, there was some of the programs that people found that they weren't operating the way that they should, and they had some written agreements.

I just want to make sure to somebody follow up to make sure the programs are operating and are following some type of guideline for the city of Pittsburgh.

Absolutely.

Uh we do have regular um check-ins with all of these groups.

Um and some of these we've already started the conversation about their new contract.

This allows us to go into those agreements.

Some of those we have not yet.

Um the ones that we've checked in with early are ones that we wanted to just make do our due diligence on.

Um and I also do want to just make a mention of Warrington is on there with Bell Sever Consensus Group and Voices Against Violence because um the McKinley building is under construction under re renovation, so it's only for the part of time where they need to operate somewhere else while that's under renovation.

Just it was actually a program up in the hill before, and it was Jim Griffin who um made sure that there was some kind of written agreement or something.

I can't remember what exactly it was.

So now that they're all up again, I just wanted to make sure that we have something in place that make sure that the programs are happening.

So there's some guidelines, you know, making sure children are safe, making sure people have clearances, all that kind of stuff.

Absolutely.

And so the two things that are required with this are three things insurance, clearances, and then their scope of work, uh, which they have to outline what their calendar is for the whole year.

Um and then that gives us, you know, it's in the contract.

These are the things that each organization says that they will do.

Um it gets attached as an exhibit to those MOUs, and if there's ever a question with it, we can always go back to those.

Um and we've started to work on those MOUs already with a couple of groups, and this this again, this will likely take into the new year to get these signed, but um, you know, we're doing our due diligence and making sure, hey, here's the MOU, here's what we've you know worked on together, here's what it'll look like moving forward, and in there it details you know what they what they are signing on to do in those spaces.

And we can um, you know, the and those those are then the directive for the department to be able to have a document that everybody's agreed to.

Here's the work, here's the location.

This is what it looks like.

Thank you.

Thank you for the question.

Also, we can leave the root relationship at any time if there's ever a problem.

Yeah, that's good to know.

Yep.

Okay, that was my only question for all of them actually.

So any further discussion?

Councilmember Warbeck.

Um yeah, just well, there's another bill, obviously, in my district for for Bergwin for the the same thing.

And um I just wanted to mention at you know, at the table with you here, as I've always been so appreciative of uh of your willingness to support these programs, right, from the city.

And um, you know, as we as we move forward, something that I am that I think would be a really good program to continue, right?

We've started it in the public in in a couple of schools with having after-school programming, right?

Hiring is to have, you know, as certainly at our city facilities, right?

If we are leasing this out to support, because at least in in the case that in Bergwind, staffing is always an issue, right?

Like these are small organizations, they don't have uh as many resources and they're trying to manage, you know, after school programming and sports programming for an entire community, right?

And um uh using uh our facilities and so if there is a way for us to help staff that with city, you know, hiring out of the community to help staff in the community, that would not only um support the program, but would also provide help provide additional kind of um oversight as councilwoman Smith is saying, right, to to and and connection between the city and the program.

Um I don't know, I I feel like that is a role that that City Parks could absolutely play.

And uh, you know, anyway, I just am very grateful to your uh willingness to explore that and to help launch that in our in some of our PPS uh schools in the district.

Thank you.

Further discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2609, please indicate by saying aye.

Affirmative recommendation, Bill 26.

Resolution authorizing the mayor and the Department of Parks and Recreation to enter into a facility usage agreement or agreements with Oz and M Inc.

and Josh Gibson Foundation for use of the AMA Recreation Center located at 2217 Bedford Avenue, in order to provide recreational and community focused activities for a term of five years at no cost to the city.

Motion to approve.

Second discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2610, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation Bill 2611.

Resolution authorizing the mayor and the Department of Parks and Recreation to enter into a facility usage agreement or agreements with poor law for use of the Bergman pool building located at 328 Mansion Street in order to provide recreational and community focused activities for term of five years at no cost to the city.

Motion to approve.

Second discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2611, please indicate by saying aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 2612.

Resolution authorizing the mayor and the director of parks and recreation to enter into a facility usage agreement or agreements with the Mount Washington Community Center for use of the Ream Recreation Center located at 321 Merrimack Street in order to provide recreational and community focused activities for a term of five years at no cost to the city.

Motion to approve brief discussion.

Second.

Second.

I just want to say this is John Masalero's the gym that he does.

He's done this for a very long time.

He does an amazing job there.

Um he's even gotten money for the floor, new windows, um, did stuff on the outside.

I can't even tell you all the stuff he's done, an entire new gym.

And he does this all on his own as a volunteer.

And so I would love to see him and Valerie Valerie who does the outside the urban the urban garden.

I would love to see, and let me just say she tries her urban garden into therapy for domestic violence survivors.

So the whole program is just an amazing place, and they're amazing people.

I would love to see them the city employees you know doing the program there.

So we talked about this briefly.

And what I'll add is it's it's kind of a similar concept to what um Councilwoman Warwick was also just talking about.

But one of the impressive things about these particular partnerships is that in a time, especially when budgets are tight.

Um these organizations do pour a lot into these centers.

A lot of time they make sure that there's a program for kids.

Um and so we do our best with the resources we have to support them, but honestly, there is some cost savings and having groups that are part of our work, and then we figure out what it means for us to support those groups.

And that that's kind of what these these agreements do that, but I think there is an evolution in the future possible to continue those kinds of arrangements.

I think they're great, but I think that in my district I notice a lot, like Sister Mary, she her and her entire team, 60 and over, all volunteers.

They don't get funding, but you always help her, and she made sure she told uh the incoming administration about how helpful you've been and how great you are to them.

So I just want to say that um and other people just know that she that and John and and Valerie are volunteers.

So just I think that we rely a lot on volunteers on our side of town, and I'd like to see them get some of the um benefit of working with the city as other pla people and other places have.

That's all.

That's it for me.

Thank you.

Councilman Cockhouse.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh I just want to compliment you, Councilwoman.

You know, reim center, there's always something going on there.

I I go by there almost every day, and besides the garden, besides the the interiorist.

I don't know what goes on there, but yeah.

They even have drug and alcohol counseling in the evening.

They open up the city.

They sit outside and evening they open it up for adult entertainment.

And dating back to when you saved the pool as well, which was uh really really nice assay.

I think you got some, you know, some philanthropists in the area that that helps save that pool, which uh I know you took the lead on.

So I will say Mr.

Dunlap helped save that pool.

It was Mr.

Dunlap who donated money.

And there's other people Paul Rennie, other people over the years have done things to make sure that that place stayed afloat.

And so I just think they've done a great job as a community making sure and working with the director.

Right, right.

And to you, Director, I just want to say, you know, I think you've done a fantastic job as a director, you know.

Um, whether it's our healthy active living centers or our parks, you've always been responsive to me and my needs and specifically Councilwoman Gross and I with our city farms uh initiative, which lives on, and that we will do our best to make sure that's part of your legacy as well of ours as well as ours.

So um, but but yeah, I just want to take a moment to thank you for for all you've done for our request and you know need on you for whatever we needed.

So um thank you.

Thank you, Councilman.

Yep.

Thank you.

Further discussion.

Seeing none you want to say.

Okay.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2612, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation, Bill 2613.

Resolution authorizing the mayor and the director of the Department of Parks and Recreation to enter into a facility usage agreement or agreements with shadow student athletes for use of the Warrington Recreation Center located at 329 East Warrington Avenue in order to provide recreational and community focused activities for a term of five years and no cost to the city.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2613, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Director.

All these programs will continue because you have great work.

Thank you.

That moves us to intergovernmental and educational affairs committee.

Deferred papers, Bill 1964.

Resolution adopting plan revision to the city of Pittsburgh's official sewage facilities plan.

For 1228 Hearing Avenue at no cost to the city.

Motion to hold for six weeks.

Second.

Discussion.

All those in favor of motion to hold Bill 1964, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Bill will be held.

Bill 25.

Resolution authorizing the approval of the 2026 Housing Opportunity Fund annual allocation plan.

Council districts all.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Second.

Discussion.

Discussion.

Councilmember Charlotte Yes.

So I you know, I I was the reason we held this last time.

That I just, you know, I do think with a transfer as large as this in the time that we're in, um, I do think it is, you know, kind of responsible for us to uh consider our options, you know, as as we're going to be doing over the next uh couple days or so.

You know, all ultimately this is the spending plan for the housing opportunity fund, not the approving the transfer.

Um, you know, I did talk to the URA staff and I appreciate them for bringing me in and walking through some of the programs here, which again I think uh you know I I spoke strongly in favor of this.

I think Councilman Lavelle did as well of how useful these programs are and beneficial they are and and um you know how they are in a lot of ways major cost savings for for other things that we would have to pay for in the city and in other cases maybe even generating revenue.

Um my uh preference on this would be to hold this uh you know, possibly for another week until we've actually figured out our budget here.

That being said, uh URA staff did indicate that with some of their traveling schedules and and the the way the end of the year might work for them that it might be difficult to have them uh be here for when that might happen.

Um so my preference is to uh to vote this through today, knowing that um if we do have to make cuts to the housing opportunity fund, um be it in its totality or be you know a portion of it, um that that they are going to have to go back to their board, go back to their um the housing opportunity fund board and figure out what the reallocation will look like and they'll have to to work from there.

But I think today, as for today, um my my request to other members is that we uh do at least push this through today, um, and if we need to revise later, then then that's what we'll have to do.

So uh thank you.

Thank you.

Further discussion.

Uh yeah, sure.

Yeah, councilman cockle.

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Um I've gotten some phone calls, and there's been many advocates uh for the HOF fund.

I just must say publicly, I'm one of them, honestly.

Um, you know, I think they do a really good thing.

Our council president made himself very clear uh last week or two weeks ago whenever we last talked about it that he would defend it, you know.

Uh to the 10th degree, and um and I agree as well.

So, you know, obviously we're looking at all options on the table for funding and where we can get funding.

Um the members that I have spoken to, most of them at this point.

I think all are we're all in agreement that this is a really good program and want to keep it and it does really good things.

So um be one of the last if we have to look at finances parts that I feel like I would want to raid.

So thank you.

Thank you.

I'll just say I wanted to thank the URA for making themselves so available.

I think other members have probably also experienced the the outreach and the explanation and the opportunities to discuss the HOF um allocation prior to this vote coming today and just making themselves so available.

So thank you to the URA staff for those individual briefings that they've offered.

It's been really helpful.

All those in favor of bill 2510, please indicate by saying aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

New papers, Bill 2606.

Resolution adopting plan revision to the City of Pittsburgh's official sewage facilities plan for 5436 Butler Street at no cost to the city.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2606, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

Bill 2607.

Resolution authorizing the issuance of a warrant in favor of Pittsburgh Regional Transit for Transportation Services for the 2025 Richard S.

Calligury Great Race on September 28, 2025, and an amount not to exceed 16,99 and 75 cent over one year.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Discussion.

Seeing none, all those in favor of Bill 2607, please indicate by saying aye.

Affirmative recommendation.

That exhausts our standing committee's agenda.

Anything from members?

Councilman McHale Smith.

So he's probably gonna kill me for saying this, but um, you know, we had a we hear from speakers sometimes, and and they're going through some struggles.

And I give Councilman Calkill a hard time all the time.

But please don't be mad at me for doing this.

But so far, I think people see you as as one way, and you know, and they don't really know who you really are as a person.

But I just want to say this while I can.

Um while back, he I told him about somebody who was homeless who needed a job, and he offered to give him a job as a roofer because he was a roofer.

The guy was a roofer.

He offered him a job, found out he actually already has somebody who was homeless previously, who was now he gave a job to who does have a job.

Then he offered his home to people to two kids that their dad passed away, and they needed a place for a um for a party for his graduation.

He wasn't even home, and he gave his house up and helped pay for the food and everything else that was that provided.

And then he um he's just done so much stuff, and then today, and I knew he's gonna kill me, but he gave me a hundred dollars to give to somebody who who was here who he thought needed, just said, and don't tell her it's from me.

I'm telling everybody it was from you.

I don't care, that was so nice.

And you've done this to Sister Mary, you've given her two hundred dollars for toys for kids.

She's not even in your district, but you think that the kid and I just want to say you have such a heart of gold, and it makes it hard for me to attack you all the time.

But I'm gonna continue to do it till I leave, okay?

But I just want to thank you for all that you do to care about people because I think because you were raised by a single mom and you know what it was like to struggle.

I think sometimes people don't see that part of you.

You know, we see you with your gold watch and you you know whatever, you know.

But I'm just gonna say you're a really good person, and I just want to thank you for what you just did today for this person, because to me it was it's what council should be doing and should be about.

So thank you for all you did.

Thank you.

And I think all of our council members are you're all just a good so good hearted.

If I could just say thank you, councilwoman.

You know, you inspire me.

I watched you go over to people.

You need to give me a hundred dollars.

You give all your money away anyway, so yeah.

You would have probably just given it away anyhow if I gave it to you.

So but but thank you so much.

That that that really means a lot to me.

And you have been an inspiration to me.

I know all the things you do for people in your community all the time.

Yeah, and um and I know how far it goes, and that's why you get probably the largest margin of vote that I've ever seen from a councilwoman in a primary, so um, because they know what you do, but um I know you don't brag about it and you don't talk about it, but but thank you so much for pointing that out.

And I haven't cried at this table yet, and uh I'm gonna try to get out of here so I don't start now.

Uh oh uh I'm gonna go cry polish our halos, okay.

Is there anything else else for members?

Madam Chair.

Councilman Council President Laval.

Thank you.

Um I just wanted to quickly respond to some of the public comment that we've heard recently regarding the housing opportunity fund as well as the stuff to balance fund.

Um obviously we just voted through the spending plan.

I want to thank my colleagues for that um in terms of moving that forward.

Um I certainly appreciate um Councilman Sharl's remarks about the reality that in lean years like this, everything has to be on the table, and I appreciate that.

Um but as one of the architects of the fund, uh reiterate that even when we continue to look at cuts, I will continue to advocate for that.

But specifically to the stop the balance fund, um, so there were a number of figures who came in this morning.

I want to be very clear about what is occurring here.

Um, I will also defend that fund as one of the architects of it.

Um I believe in the work, I believe in what is happening, and I will continue to advocate on its behalf.

But I want to be clear to the public.

We are not defunding the stop the balance fund.

We're not actually removing funding, any funding from the stock balance fund.

If we were doing so, we would not have been able to approve the six million dollar contract we approved today.

If we were doing so, we would not have the ability to approve the anchor institutions that are going to come before us next week.

However, with that being said, the reality is over the course of the last four years, we have not expended down the annual transfer of the dollars into that fund.

Therefore, we actually have more dollars in that fund than can be expended at this time.

Therefore, I did introduce legislation yesterday that would pause funding for the transfer of 2026 funds out of our general fund into that special trust fund.

Yeah.

With that being said, there's because we have not spent down the money, even with a pause, there would still be enough money in the 2026 budget to continue all our services that the stop the bond trust fund funds.

And so what I will be proposing is not a transfer of the full two million dollars, because as I've already stated, we have an abundance of money sitting there to cover all of our expenses for next year.

But I will propose only trip a transfer of five million dollars so that going into 27, we can again continue the full service that that current fund proposes.

So at our next state committee meeting, I will bring forth an amendment to transfer five million.

The other remaining five, it'll be my suggestion that we take four million of it and put it towards our fleet.

Um given our whether we're talking EMS services, whether we're talking having enough vehicles to applow our streets in a snowstorm as we just experienced.

With all that being said, with the transfer of just five million dollars into the fund, we will still be able to maintain all our current activities within the stop to balance fund.

So I'm just going to reiterate, we're not taking money away from it.

We're not defunding it.

And then come 27 when we the standard 10 million would be authored, and this fund will continue to do what it does, and all those who have been funding received funding from it will be able to continue to work.

So I just want to be clear on the front end.

Um so the public knows their concerns are not what's actually happening.

Um we are still funding those efforts.

We are still funding this this effort to bring balance down within our city.

Um so that's it.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Is there anything further from members at this time?

Councilperson Charlotte.

Just briefly, I am having the post agenda on uh homelessness at three o'clock.

I know that there's a lot uh going on with all of us, and um, but uh would appreciate if members could uh could join.

So thank you.

Thank you.

We do have meeting announcements.

As we just heard today at 3 p.m.

Council will hold a cable cast post-agenda discussion on winter time and homelessness chaired by councilperson Charlotte.

On Thursday, December 18th at 130 p.m.

Count bear with me, this is long.

Uh council will hold their line item vote on the 2026 budget.

This Saturday, December 20th at 11 a.m., council will hold a cable cast public hearing for tax budget and citizen participation.

Speaker registration will close at 8 a.m.

Saturday morning.

And Sunday, December 21st at 11 a.m.

Council will meet for a special standing committees meeting.

Speaker registration.

Sorry, there is a little bit of a so at 11 a.m.

we'll we'll meet for a special standing committee's meeting.

Speaker registration will close at 9 a.m.

Also on Sunday at 2 p.m., council will hold a special regular meeting of uh council speaker registration will close at 1230 p.m.

Next week, council will hold their regular meeting and standing committee meeting on Monday, December 22nd at 10 a.m.

and 130 p.m.

respectively.

To register to speak at these meetings and hearings, please fill out the sign-up form on the council meeting webpage by the deadlines, and you may also call the clerk's office at 412-255-2138.

Anything further from members?

Can I get a motion to approve the minutes and adjourn the meeting?

The move.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Meeting is adjourned.

Thank you.

Good job.